I was reading over this thread from FFJ- The Glenn McNeill Case:
Status: De....dcourier.com/main.asp?Typ...ionID=1&Page=3
And just wanted to bring over some parts from a post cynic made:
The Glenn McNeill Case:
Status: Defendant successfully prosecuted and currently in prison
Type of Case: Homicide, circumstantial
DNA: Analysis of Miss Patton's underwear found evidence of a mixed DNA profile from two females. Unidentified female DNA under Patton's fingernails and on her shorts and underpants
The murder case of Janelle Patton clearly illustrates that matching DNA in three locations can have an innocent explanation and have no bearing, whatsoever, on the prosecution of the case. The DNA of the man who committed the crime (McNeill) was not found on the body of the victim.
McNeill was arrested in February and charged with murdering Janelle Patton, whose death was the first murder recorded on the self-governing island in 150 years.
The body of the 29-year-old was found wrapped in plastic at a picnic spot on Easter Sunday 2002.
Forensic evidence presented at a hearing into the murder of Janelle Patton on Norfolk Island has shown no DNA link to the New Zealand man accused of killing her.
The court has heard expert testimony from scientists who tested Miss Patton's clothing for DNA traces. Of more than 100 samples, they were unable to find the accused's profile on any of them.
Analysis of Miss Patton's underwear found evidence of a mixed DNA profile from two females.
Unidentified female DNA under Patton's fingernails and on her shorts and underpants, coupled with the ferocity of the attack, suggested motives such as "jealousy, rage, anger and revenge" emotions that could be felt only by someone who, unlike McNeill, knew Patton, the defense lawyer claimed.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/news/artic...220&ref=imthis
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/t...-1111113128516
McNeill was primarily convicted on the basis of fingerprint evidence and his confession.
A later appeal of the verdict was rejected.
The Janelle Patton case demonstrates that forensic evidence that doesnt fit within the larger context of a case can be dismissed as evidence that must have an innocent explanation.
Part One
Janelle P 1 - YouTube
Part Two
Janelle P 2 - YouTube
Part Three
Janelle P 3 - YouTube
Part Four
Janelle P 4 - YouTube
The Steven DeMocker Case:
Status: Prosecution in progress
Type of Case: Homicide, circumstantial
DNA: DNA from 3 unidentified men found in 3 locations:
Under the fingernails of the victims left hand.
On the victims left hand
On a cell phone held by the victim.
Although the prosecution of DeMocker began with the DNA being of unknown origin, one profile (out of three unknown profiles) was later identified as contamination from a prior autopsy.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...519issues.html
September 1, 2010
A scientist who works at a private laboratory testified Wednesday that Carol Kennedy had DNA from three unknown men underneath the fingernails of her left hand.
Alexis Brown, a supervisor at the Sorenson Forensic laboratory in Salt Lake City, Utah, told a jury in the murder trial for Kennedy's ex-husband, Steven DeMocker, that Kennedy also had DNA from three unknown males on her left hand itself.
In addition, Brown said, a cordless phone that her laboratory tested showed the DNA from three unidentified males. Tests found that the DNA had not come from DeMocker, she said. Kennedy was talking to her mother on the phone in the evening of July 2, 2008, when she suddenly exclaimed, "Oh, no," and the call ended. Her mother, Ruth Kennedy, became alarmed when she could not then reach her daughter and eventually called the Yavapai County Sheriff's Office. A deputy looked into a window of Carol Kennedy's Williamson Valley home and saw her body on the floor of a room she used as an office. A cordless phone lay nearby.
Brown said tests excluded DeMocker's DNA from the samples taken from Kennedy's hand, nails and the cell phone.
Previously, Dr. Philip Keene, who performed the autopsy on Kennedy, said the nail clippers he used to clip her nails were pulled from a drawer and might not have been sterile.
DeMocker, who voluntarily gave a statement to detectives the night of his former wife's death, said that he had been riding his mountain bike on trails near Granite Mountain at the time of her death. He offered to give them blood and DNA samples.
Det. Luis Huante, one of the initial investigators, testified that DeMocker aroused his suspicions when he came to Kennedy's Bridal Path house that evening after his younger daughter told him that her mother died. DeMocker asked Huante if he was a suspect. Also, Huante noted scratches on DeMocker's arms and legs that DeMocker said came from bushes along the trail.
http://www.dcourier.com/main.asp?Sec...=293&btnView=1
In September of 2010, the prosecution was pretty sure that the unidentified DNA that the defense was touting as DNA from the real killer(s) was the result of contamination. They were right.
6 months later the owner of the major DNA profile in the case was identified
March 21, 2011
DeMocker trial: Mystery DNA identified
Results support prosecution's nail clipper contamination theory
PRESCOTT - The DNA found on fingernail clippings of the victim in the murder trial of Steven C. DeMocker has been identified as being that of a man who may have died prior to or shortly after Carol Kennedy, according to documents obtained by the Courier.
The results may substantiate claims by the prosecution that the nail clippers used by the medical examiner were contaminated.
The prosecution in the DeMocker trial on Monday asked Judge Warren R. Darrow to order the Chino Valley Medical Center and the Yavapai Regional Medical Center to release the medical records of Ronald Lloyd Birman, who, the document said, "has been identified as the major donor of the DNA profile, previously unknown" by the Department of Public Safety's crime lab.
The Yavapai County Medical Examiner, Dr. Philip Keene, did an autopsy and determined Birman bled to death after an arterial graft failed.
DeMocker is accused of beating to death Kennedy, his ex-wife, on July 2, 2008.
The timing of the Birman's death will play a crucial role in DeMocker's retrial, as will the existence of DNA on Kennedy's body from what appears to be a totally unrelated person, which may point to contamination at Keene's office, as previously reported in the Courier.
Kennedy's fingernail contained DNA from three people, one "major" profile and two "minor" profiles. The DNA test results are believed to refer to the "major" profile, according to testimony quoted in the Courier.
On Aug. 24, 2010, Dr. Keene testified under examination by Deputy County Attorney Joseph C. Butner III that the clippers used to trim Kennedy's nails for evidence had not been sterilized.
The prosecution says in the motion that it wants to "corroborate the findings of the DPS crime lab."
Because a gag order has been imposed on the trial, neither side was able to speak about the motion or the identification made by DPS.
Scott Orr, The Daily Courier
http://www.dcourier.com/main.asp?Typ...ionID=1&Page=3
BBM. Wow.
