Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #99

[Cherokee]

Another DNA question -

What if BG is not the biological child of 1 or both parents? Wouldn't that throw testing off?

I'm sorry, I'm trying to reply so quickly, I'm afraid I did not answer your question fully.

Autosomal DNA is the most common DNA testing, and it is the one used to build a DNA family tree. That kind of tree is separate and distinct from a family tree a person might claim as their ancestors or what is written in a book, a family Bible or baptismal records/birth records.

Y-DNA can be used to help identify a male line of ancestry. Mitochondrial or mtDNA is helpful to confirm a female line of ancestry. Both are not as specific as autosomal DNA, but I do know of several instances where it revealed the truth surrounding a person's birth.

Familial DNA testing as now used by LE is based on autosomal DNA testing. Once the results are ready, they are uploaded to a database to find matches, usually they are at the 4th or 5th cousin level. Then the real work begins because you don't automatically have a name or surname. You have to start building DNA trees using genealogical detective work and try to find the point where those DNA trees come together to one family and one person.

JMO.

 

[Imvp2]

The jacket he's wearing is so worn with the weapon imprint pretty apparent. It had to have been his for awhile. As well it always seemed to me it had navy camo sleeves, distinct in my opinion. And I'm thinking he has a black and white skull trim balaclava around his neck and the white is what we see. It would be positioned there so he could quickly pull it up over his face as a disguise. My opinion, surely someone would remember a son, boyfriend, coworker, neighbor, etc wearing both or one

 

[cluciano63]

Just because they may have DNA, doesn’t mean that sexual assault occurred.

They are unwilling to answer the question, but I don’t see that as evidence of SA, one way or another.

I say this, because there’s plenty of other ways that he could have left his DNA at the crime scene, or on the victims (if they scratched him for instance).

I know. But it is still the most likely motive for these murders to me.

 

[margarita25]

I posted it a couple of times, but I don't know how to link it. (I was hoping someone else would)
The article is called, "Familial DNA search might unlock Delphi Killer's identity." It's from Journal and Courier, June 1, 2018.
In it Leazenby discusses the possibility of using it and there is a lot of other information too.

Familial DNA search might unlock Delphi killer's identity

Thank you for bringing forward this article, reposting in the media thread for quick reference. Definitely worth a full read (again).

——

So, here’s where they were with all this DNA business last year, June of 2018:

Familial DNA search might unlock Delphi killer's identity
June 1, 2018

“If there is DNA evidence from Libby and Abby's killing, what if police ran a search using familial DNA? If the suspect's family member — a brother or father, for example — has been arrested or convicted of felony charges, familial DNA might be the break that's needed in the case that shook the country.

“Crime runs in families,” he said. “No one disputes that. Ask any beat cop.”“

Snip

“Recently asked about familial DNA searches and the homicide investigation into German and Williams' death, Carroll County Sheriff Tobe Leazenby said, “Obviously the answer hasn‘t come to the surface, yet.

“This is out of the box, so what can it hurt?”“

Snip

““That’s being discussed," Leazenby said of the outcome of Holland's call, "but there hasn’t been a decision made yet. It’s on the table.”

“It might help us reach success.””

Snip

“Meanwhile, if there's DNA from the Delphi killings, it's not been run through familial DNA search. Yet.”
June 1, 2018

 

[cluciano63]

I thought it was an open fact that Libby fought like hell, and that they were able to get DNA from under her fingernails. Is this just conjecture? If true, could it be they just don't have enough or it is contaminated?

This was how her grandfather described her...that she would have fought. We have no idea if there was ever even an opportunity,

 

[Cherokee]

The Kinds of Tissues That DNA Can Be Extracted From to Make DNA Fingerprints

@Cherokee, I am going to find one old article and post it here. I think the idea behind DNA-identification of Jack the Ripper in itself is bull., but I want to know your opinion about the DNA from old shawl.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/201...-analysis-finally-reveal-identity-jack-ripper

Re. the Delphi case: I simply hope that one of the girls scratched him bad enough, and there are epithelial cells or maybe, blood, left under her nails (and if he cleansed the area, and there are none - this is the first proof that insanity defense won’t work for him, that he knew what he was doing and that there is zero remorse).

It seriously might be the situation when there is some DNA left, but not good enough, but in these two years, science has moved far enough to allow to work with what they have.

JMO.

I see you found the article you were looking for regarding the shawl.

Thank you. THIS is an excellent example of the limits of touch DNA, it's susceptibility to contamination and a non-existent chain of custody regarding evidence or possible evidence.

The majority opinion of true DNA experts, researchers and forensic genealogists regarding this article, as well as the author's premise and conclusion, is that it is a bunch of bunk. It cannot be proven the shawl was from the victim, nor can it be proven the DNA found on the shawl is not contamination or some other artifact.

You'll notice no major lab or research scientist has been willing to verify the alleged results. I'm afraid the author has tried to use unverified DNA results from an unverified piece of clothing in order to promote their book.

There is much more to this story than I feel comfortable posting here, but suffice it to say, many people feel the author would have been a worthy hire of Mr. P. T. Barnum.

 

[Cherokee]

And my suspicion, that the perp might be adopted, is still viable, in my mind.

RSBM

It doesn't matter if the perp is adopted. It doesn't matter one bit.

DNA would still lead to the right person. DNA is not based on who a person says their parents are. DNA will still lead to the bio family and lots of bio cousins.

JMO.

 

[MassGuy]

I know. But it is still the most likely motive for these murders to me.

The motive can be sexual, but that doesn’t mean sexual assault occurred.

Sometimes the act of killing itself, is what drives these guys.

That’s what provides the gratification.

There is also the possibility that he intended sexual assault, but was unable to carry it out.

Anything is possible though.

 

[Charlot123]

Another DNA question -

What if BG is not the biological child of 1 or both parents? Wouldn't that throw testing off?

This is what my question was, too.

Let us think positively, that there is enough DNA from the crime scene, and the LE have high index of suspicion. Then technically, the easiest thing is to ask POI for the DNA sample. If he refuses, then they will probably go the parents, and if the parents refuse, to the trees.

If he is the bio child of at least one parent, it should be good enough. MOO.

What if he is adopted?

A straightforward adoption is hard to conceal these days, and adoptions are usually open. So they will come to the trees of his bio parents, and back, to adoption, and to him.

Two situations are more difficult, an international adoption from a non-Western European country, and embryo adoption. But I hope that embryo adoption is regulated, so that there is a trace; then it will simply take longer.

An international adoption leaves a definite paper trail, and most countries have own genealogy databases, but it might be a dead end.

Another dead end, if there is not enough DNA, and the person is adopted.

P.S. One more dead end - if he is the biochild of only one parent, and that parent was adopted in closed adoption. But it is too dramatic.

MOO

 

[margarita25]

RSBM

It doesn't matter if the perp is adopted. It doesn't matter one bit.

DNA would still lead to the right person. DNA is not based on who a person says their parents are. DNA will still lead to the bio family and lots of bio cousins.

JMO.

And if he’s never been in touch with his biological family? Can it be certain that there are always adoption records which would lead to the person’s location today?

 

[Imvp2]

Just my opinion but the coat has been his for a very long time. Yes lots of people wear variations. I'm just north of the area. I see them I get it. But this one appears to have camo sleeves
And the balaclava that's distinct
These two items along with the new sketch may just jog someone's memory

 

[margarita25]

How long does it take for dna results?
If investigators took DNA from several potential suspects last week, when with the results come in?

(@carbuff, he/she may be able to answer)

 

[margarita25]

Then why show a sketch? Makes no sense to me. If it is a sketch of a person known to them, that seems very misleading and kind of iffy, in a way...like we are showing you this drawing but not giving away his identity kind of thing.

If they knew who he was, the PC would have been only to withdraw the incorrect sketch...not add a new one to the confusion.

Jmo

I agree. I seriously doubt this sketch is of a specific, known person, moo. I’ve never been in this camp.

I thought it was an open fact that Libby fought like hell, and that they were able to get DNA from under her fingernails. Is this just conjecture? If true, could it be they just don't have enough or it is contaminated?

I have not seen this reported in any msm source.

 

[margarita25]

Delete / consolidate

 

[Charlot123]

JMO.

I see you found the article you were looking for regarding the shawl.

Thank you. THIS is an excellent example of the limits of touch DNA, it's susceptibility to contamination and a non-existent chain of custody regarding evidence or possible evidence.

The majority opinion of true DNA experts, researchers and forensic genealogists regarding this article, as well as the author's premise and conclusion, is that it is a bunch of bunk. It cannot be proven the shawl was from the victim, nor can it be proven the DNA found on the shawl is not contamination or some other artifact.

You'll notice no major lab or research scientist has been willing to verify the alleged results. I'm afraid the author has tried to use unverified DNA results from an unverified piece of clothing in order to promote their book.

There is much more to this story than I feel comfortable posting here, but suffice it to say, many people feel the author would have been a worthy hire of Mr. P. T. Barnum.

It did not look reasonable to me when I was reading it for the first time, because chain of custody was questionable.

However, I was more interested in the fact that they lifted some DNA from an old shawl. Whose, is, of course, unprovable.

(Agree that there are other elements in this article that I personally didn’t like, and mainly, I don’t believe Aron K. was a suspect. Just didn’t fit the profile, period).

Another example - the bones of the Romanoff family. I don’t know whose bones they found, but the sole fact that they were able to extract mitoDNA from old burned bodies is amazing.

 

[Cherokee]

And if he’s never been in touch with his biological family? Can it be certain that there are always adoption records which would lead to the person’s location today?

JMO.

Adoption records don't matter. The adoptive family's name doesn't matter.

Let me try to explain it this way.

A and B adopt a child. They name it C. However, C's real bio parents are X and Y. C's DNA shows he is the child of X and Y through familial/autosomal DNA. In fact, he was named Z at birth.

So Z (under the name of C) has been living in the Delphi area for the past 25 years or so, presumably under the surname of A and B.

Let's say, Z becomes a suspect and LE wants his DNA. He refuses. So, LE tails him and pick up a napkin Z used to wipe his mouth at Subway. They find saliva DNA and the results show Z's match to hundreds of people but not to A and B.

No problem. Once the DNA trees are built, and the bio family is found, then the adoption records can be opened by subpoena because there is enough reason for a judge to sign off on a warrant due to the DNA results.

 

[Cherokee]

And if he’s never been in touch with his biological family? Can it be certain that there are always adoption records which would lead to the person’s location today?

JMO.

Yes. It does not matter if the suspect has ever had contact with his bio family. He WILL be found. Trust me. I have worked these types of cases.

 

[MistyWaters]

JMO.

They cannot lift true conventional DNA from clothes if it does not come from saliva, semen, blood or some other bodily fluid. "Touch DNA" or "Trace DNA" is very controversial and unreliable. It cannot be used in a court of law because it is extremely susceptible to contamination. There can be secondary and tertiary transfer.

We shed millions of DNA cells every day, and we are covered with the cells of other humans; on our clothes, on our skin, even on our faces. DNA is so infinitesimal, it is hard for us to even imagine how minute it truly is because we are programmed to see a larger world.

The real world is not a CSI episode. The general public has been conditioned to expect whole DNA and DNA that can be dated to the crime scene. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Excellent post! I wish I could mark your post with an outstanding LIKE!

The article below is a good illustration of why a crime is not solved by DNA alone:

Framed for Murder by His Own DNA
FRAMED FOR MURDER BY HIS OWN DNA

 

[margarita25]

JMO.

Adoption records don't matter. The adoptive family's name doesn't matter.

Let me try to explain it this way.

A and B adopt a child. They name it C. However, C's real bio parents are X and Y. And C's DNA shows he is the child of X and Y through familial/autosomal DNA. In fact, he was named Z at birth.

So Z (under the name of C) has been living in the Delphi area for the past 25 years or so, presumably under the surname of A and B.

Let's say, Z becomes a suspect and LE wants his DNA. He refuses. So, LE tails him and pick up a napkin Z used to wipe his mouth at Subway. They find saliva DNA and the results show Z's match to hundreds of people but not to A and B.

No problem. Once the DNA trees are built, and the bio family is found, then the adoption records can be opened by subpoena because there is enough reason for a judge to sign off on a warrant due to the DNA results.

I see

 

[Cherokee]

It did not look reasonable to me when I was reading it for the first time, because chain of custody was questionable.

However, I was more interested in the fact that they lifted some DNA from an old shawl. Whose, is, of course, unprovable.

(Agree that there are other elements in this article that I personally didn’t like, and mainly, I don’t believe Aron K. was a suspect. Just didn’t fit the profile, period).

Another example - the bones of the Romanoff family. I don’t know whose bones they found, but the sole fact that they were able to extract mitoDNA from old burned bodies is amazing.

JMO.

Whose DNA they lifted, as you said, is unknown. Considering no lab replicated the results, that in and of itself is a huge red flag. Contamination is such a huge issue when dealing with DNA, and it is THE issue with so-called "touch DNA."

They did find the Romanoff family. It was proven through mtDNA, and the discovery was very exciting! The Bolsheviks tried to obliterate those bones with acid and fire, and STILL DNA helped identify the family. I have read many articles and books on the Romanoffs and the DNA extraction, testing and results. It was not based on "touch DNA" but on full extraction from cell tissue in the bones. Now THAT is real DNA solving a real mystery.