The Eikelenbooms and Touch DNA

[chckmate22]

Sorry if this has been brought up already ...but only testing for male DNA - only stops the bus from GA LA JG RK TL - doesnt the lack of male DNA only help the states case more? This is just so confusing? The only reason I see testing for only male DNA is because they already knew what female DNA they would recover? or is this going to be "junk science"? I always ask myself "what were they thinking"

 

[LambChop]

It's really very simple. The defense proved two things with their testing. There is no male DNA present and because there is no DNA from Caylee the body was probably out there for a long period of time and underwater just as witnesses claim the area conditions were during this period of time Caylee was missing. So it sounds as if that door is closed to them.

FBI found nothing. Absence of Caylee's DNA is significant because there should have been some traces if the body were placed there recently. jmo

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

:waitasec: I don't understand this?

1) Purposely neglecting to test for female DNA when it could have excluded Casey Anthony from being the last one to be with Caylee Anthony before she was thrown out into those woods accomplishes nothing. The only thing that is has accomplished, and now that it is out there for a jury to hear at trial, is that the defense can not prove that Casey was not the one to throw Caylee out into those woods. As a matter of fact, it makes it look much more likely that Casey Anthony was the one who threw Caylee out into those woods because they purposely neglected to exclude her. Could this be an appeals issue?

2) The fact is, they found NO male DNA that can be linked back to any of these men so what have they accomplished? They have proven that none of these men had an active role in throwing Caylee out into those woods. Nice accomplishment!

Creating reasonable doubt is not what they have done here. They have actually given a jury a reason to have no doubt that Casey was the one and only person to throw Caylee out into those woods.

Sorry if this has been brought up already ...but only testing for male DNA - only stops the bus from GA LA JG RK TL - doesnt the lack of male DNA only help the states case more? This is just so confusing? The only reason I see testing for only male DNA is because they already knew what female DNA they would recover? or is this going to be "junk science"? I always ask myself "what were they thinking"

It's really very simple. The defense proved two things with their testing. There is no male DNA present and because there is no DNA from Caylee the body was probably out there for a long period of time and underwater just as witnesses claim the area conditions were during this period of time Caylee was missing. So it sounds as if that door is closed to them.

FBI found nothing. Absence of Caylee's DNA is significant because there should have been some traces if the body were placed there recently. jmo

Give them enough rope and they will hang themselves....ITA with you and might I add, THE DEFENSE TEAM JUST DID THEIR OWN CLIENT IN! She is Toast, done, gone, kaput....

I believe GA/CA might want to start practicing groveling....they need to beg for mercy, leniency and hope His Honor might have some empathy or she might just meet her maker sooner than expected...His Honor said she he watched the execution/prsecuted the Black Widow, he has never seen evil since this case or had he seen evil before this case...He might want to rephrase that after ICA's case is done...I believe she too is evil, cold hearted, cold blooded and may God have mercy on her soul...JMHO


Justice for Caylee

 

[Mamabear1963]

Sorry if this has been brought up already ...but only testing for male DNA - only stops the bus from GA LA JG RK TL - doesnt the lack of male DNA only help the states case more? This is just so confusing? The only reason I see testing for only male DNA is because they already knew what female DNA they would recover? or is this going to be "junk science"? I always ask myself "what were they thinking"

Was prowling around this morning...and thought this might be an interesting topic...now that we know we have a huge bus headed down the pike

 

[md89]

This is my first thread so I hope I don't do anything wrong. This just broke on my local news (I live in Holland).

http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/10033594/__Nederlander_deskundige_in_VS__.html?p=10,1

The article is in Dutch so I tried to translate it:

"Dutch expert testifies in U.S. murder case."

ORLANDO (Florida) - A Dutch forensic expert is involved in the investigation of a child murder that gripped the whole U.S.

DNA- and trace expert Richard Eikelenboom will be questioned in a Florida courtoom as an expert witness in the case of the horror murder of a 2 year old toddler.

The 'mega trial' is being broadcast live in every state of America just like the O.J. Simpson trial years ago. America was startled in June 2008 by the disappearence of toddler Caylee Anthony from Orlando. Months later, a meter reader found the remains of the child wrapped in plastic bags near her home.

Caylee's mom, 25 year old Casey Anthony, is suspected of murdering the child and could be sentenced to death if she is found guilty. Richard Eikelenboom will explain for the Orange County courthouse what the investigation techniques are, especially in the DNA area. His expertise in the Caylee Anthony case focuses on collecting DNA (skin cells, blood, hairs or other tissue) that could be left on the victim by their killer.

-------

At the end there is a little about his lab and that they're being called in by foreigners more often. I'm sure I made some mistakes in translating this article but I hope you can understand. :winko:

 

[MaryB]

What will he be testifying to? There was only female DNA on Caylee's little clothes.

 

[beach]

:bump:

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Bump.

 

[BuffaloChuck]

One argument 'against' Touch-DNA impresses me. If "touch DNA" was useful, why aren't skeletons covered in it? Why is it so necessary to cut a bone and extract it from another source rather than all that DNA that used to be skin and tissue?

Of course, our outer-skin - facing the atmosphere - is different than our tissue contacting bone. Far less worries about tan-lines, wrinkling.

Still... if Touch-DNA is useful, then why aren't skeletons Source #1 - for Touch DNA?

 

[ami]

One argument 'against' Touch-DNA impresses me. If "touch DNA" was useful, why aren't skeletons covered in it? Why is it so necessary to cut a bone and extract it from another source rather than all that DNA that used to be skin and tissue?

Of course, our outer-skin - facing the atmosphere - is different than our tissue contacting bone. Far less worries about tan-lines, wrinkling.

Still... if Touch-DNA is useful, then why aren't skeletons Source #1 - for Touch DNA?

Dr. Vass gave a great talk during his initial testimony in the State's case about all the process the cells go through during decomposition after the body dies. It was really easy to understand but also had a lot of detail and was engaging and interesting!

But the upshot is that the cells are essentially digested (by their own internal chemistry and by bacteria and eventually by exposure to the elements) and so by the time a body is a skeleton, there wouldn't be much/any human cellular DNA left to analyze. Especially in the presence of water and heat. DNA just wouldn't stay intact very long under those conditions.

 

[joypath]

Dr. Vass gave a great talk during his initial testimony in the State's case about all the process the cells go through during decomposition after the body dies. It was really easy to understand but also had a lot of detail and was engaging and interesting!

But the upshot is that the cells are essentially digested (by their own internal chemistry and by bacteria and eventually by exposure to the elements) and so by the time a body is a skeleton, there wouldn't be much/any human cellular DNA left to analyze. Especially in the presence of water and heat. DNA just wouldn't stay intact very long under those conditions.

:twocents: To clarify a "smidge": "touch DNA" is a process that assists in the identification of a DNA pattern from very small samples of an unknown, in lay terms, a few CELLS are used in the "touch" process. "touch" is so called because it takes the shed epithelial cells available from touching, handling, pulling on/off an item, etc. rather than taking cells from the human organism where MORE cells are present & available.


The statement above: ""so by the time a body is a skeleton, there wouldn't be much/any human cellular DNA left to analyze".....
relates to the possibility of "pulling off" foreign (the perp's) cells (epithelial aka skin) and due to the reasons stated in the second sentence, which are totally correct on "on the money", making the retrieval of Perpetrator's (or according to Baez, Roy's:floorlaugh DNA probability totally NIL.

DNA of the VICTIM within the protected celluar material (ie. bone marrow, histiocytes (bone cells), possibly tooth pulp) COULD be isolated and tested via conventional DNA methodology.

Further info (in people language): http://www.forensicmag.com/article/touch-dna

"THE" company supplying testing "kits" to worldwide agencies (yeah, even the Netherlands): http://www.bodetech.com/forensic-solutions/dna-technologies/touch-dna/ The link is their description of touch DNA, the entire site is loaded with good info (IMHO), & an agency filled with hard working, nice, smart helpful people!