Post by hope on Jul 13, 2021 8:20:25 GMT -6
We talked about making some of these threads; DNA, evidence, fingerprints, etc. & I think it's a great idea. Anyone who has any info to add please do : )
Before adding DNA items related to Keddie, I recently learned some interesting things in regards to DNA in general, thanks to Jenson & Holes♡
1.) Sexual assault testing. During their Black Dhalia episode: www.stitcher.com/show/jensen-and-holes-the-murder-squad/episode/elizabeth-short-the-black-dahlia-200154483 (30: 20 mark). It was noted "no sperm present" in the autopsy report of Elizabeth Short. Paul said that means absolutely nothing to him, without knowing the method used to determine if there a sexual assault occurred.
Prior to being a cold-case investigator he was a forensic scientist & worked in the crime lab. He said he couldn't tell you how many times samples received & tested in his lab came back positive for sperm, after being told by the investigating department "no sperm present". Basically during autopsy many times the Pathologist will just view the sample under the microscope & if they do not see sperm they note no sexual assault. However, when investigators took the extra step of sending a sample to the crime lab for advanced testing sperm was located.
This makes me wonder about Sue. What type of testing was done on her? If the sample wasn't sent to the crime lab, were swabs taken? Do they still exist? If the proper testing wasn't done, could there be perpetrator DNA there?
This issue is also discussed in their newest episode: www.stitcher.com/show/jensen-and-holes-the-murder-squad/episode/the-murder-of-mary-morgan-pewitt-part-1-200228770 (34: 40 mark). In this episode they have the autopsy report of the victim to review. Paul said if swabs are taken it should be noted in the autopsy report or a seperate report made by LE if not noted by the Pathologist. Paul said there is no indication sexual assault swabs were collected in this case as nothing was noted in the autopsy. This murder happened in 1988. I haven't reread Sue's autopsy report yet to see if any of these things are noted.
2.) Mixed DNA samples. Discussed in their JonBenet episode: www.stitcher.com/show/jensen-and-holes-the-murder-squad/episode/jensen-and-holes-winter-distraction-the-case-of-jonbenet-200154807
(47: 00 mark). It is apparently very difficult to seperate & identify suspect DNA from a mixed sample. It is easily done with sperm samples because the DNA Analysts are able perform a differential digest & remove the DNA that is located outside of the sperm. They are able clean up the sample & collect the male DNA from the 'sperm head'. However, if you have a sample that is a mixture of two different people's blood, you cannot seperate that. In Jonbenet's case the mixed sample consisted of an unknown male and probably her DNA. Paul said if the sample is too mixed the forensic genealogy testing will not work. You need a pretty clean single source profile for forensic genealogy.
3.) M-VAC. Also discussed during the Jonbenet episode. Has proven very successful in certain cases, especially on nonporous items such as rocks when used as the murder weapon. The m-vac will pull the holder's DNA off of the item, it collects low level DNA from areas the perpetrator has held. It is difficult to swab nonporous items which makes it difficult to obtain DNA for traditional DNA testing.
I wonder how much testing has been done on the weapons left at the scene? Have they been retested since touch DNA became available? Would the m-vac work on the hammer of knife handles?
4.) Hair testing. Do the hairs found in Johnny's hands, on his sleeve or the hairs found near the victims still exist?
Please say they do. When DNA testing first became available, DNA could only be collected from hair if the follicle was still attached. It has come a long way since then.
In one of the episodes I listened to a while ago, I forget which one it was, but Paul discussed advances with hair samples. He said within the past year a Dr. Green at UC Santa Cruz has been very successful working with tiny hair fragments. Even hairs that are significantly degraded. Cases have been solved using this technology. Cases where traditional DNA technology has failed to produce any type of DNA profile, they have been able to get whole genome sequences using Dr. Green's technique. They can then extract out the markers that can be used to search genealogy databases.
If those hairs still exist, to me it's a no-brainer PCSO should look into this technology. And as always, Jenson & Holes told the investigating police department they would put them in touch with their resources within in the FBI utilizing this technology successfully and they would provide the full funding for the testing.
5.) Bonus Just for fun, some cool things unrelated to Keddie:
• DB Cooper. DB Cooper left one thing behind when he jumped from that airplane, his clip on tie. Investigators have been able to obtain a DNA sample from it, so maybe one day soon will find out who DB Cooper really was. It was just amazing to me that the FBI literally only have 1 piece of evidence from him & they were able to get his DNA. Makes you think of Keddie & all those pieces of evidence. It seems impossible they can't get DNA off of something.
• "The Boy in the Box". His DNA was recently submitted for forensic genealogy testing. Hopefully that sweet little boy will get his name back soon.
Before adding DNA items related to Keddie, I recently learned some interesting things in regards to DNA in general, thanks to Jenson & Holes♡
1.) Sexual assault testing. During their Black Dhalia episode: www.stitcher.com/show/jensen-and-holes-the-murder-squad/episode/elizabeth-short-the-black-dahlia-200154483 (30: 20 mark). It was noted "no sperm present" in the autopsy report of Elizabeth Short. Paul said that means absolutely nothing to him, without knowing the method used to determine if there a sexual assault occurred.
Prior to being a cold-case investigator he was a forensic scientist & worked in the crime lab. He said he couldn't tell you how many times samples received & tested in his lab came back positive for sperm, after being told by the investigating department "no sperm present". Basically during autopsy many times the Pathologist will just view the sample under the microscope & if they do not see sperm they note no sexual assault. However, when investigators took the extra step of sending a sample to the crime lab for advanced testing sperm was located.
This makes me wonder about Sue. What type of testing was done on her? If the sample wasn't sent to the crime lab, were swabs taken? Do they still exist? If the proper testing wasn't done, could there be perpetrator DNA there?
This issue is also discussed in their newest episode: www.stitcher.com/show/jensen-and-holes-the-murder-squad/episode/the-murder-of-mary-morgan-pewitt-part-1-200228770 (34: 40 mark). In this episode they have the autopsy report of the victim to review. Paul said if swabs are taken it should be noted in the autopsy report or a seperate report made by LE if not noted by the Pathologist. Paul said there is no indication sexual assault swabs were collected in this case as nothing was noted in the autopsy. This murder happened in 1988. I haven't reread Sue's autopsy report yet to see if any of these things are noted.
2.) Mixed DNA samples. Discussed in their JonBenet episode: www.stitcher.com/show/jensen-and-holes-the-murder-squad/episode/jensen-and-holes-winter-distraction-the-case-of-jonbenet-200154807
(47: 00 mark). It is apparently very difficult to seperate & identify suspect DNA from a mixed sample. It is easily done with sperm samples because the DNA Analysts are able perform a differential digest & remove the DNA that is located outside of the sperm. They are able clean up the sample & collect the male DNA from the 'sperm head'. However, if you have a sample that is a mixture of two different people's blood, you cannot seperate that. In Jonbenet's case the mixed sample consisted of an unknown male and probably her DNA. Paul said if the sample is too mixed the forensic genealogy testing will not work. You need a pretty clean single source profile for forensic genealogy.
3.) M-VAC. Also discussed during the Jonbenet episode. Has proven very successful in certain cases, especially on nonporous items such as rocks when used as the murder weapon. The m-vac will pull the holder's DNA off of the item, it collects low level DNA from areas the perpetrator has held. It is difficult to swab nonporous items which makes it difficult to obtain DNA for traditional DNA testing.
I wonder how much testing has been done on the weapons left at the scene? Have they been retested since touch DNA became available? Would the m-vac work on the hammer of knife handles?
4.) Hair testing. Do the hairs found in Johnny's hands, on his sleeve or the hairs found near the victims still exist?
Please say they do. When DNA testing first became available, DNA could only be collected from hair if the follicle was still attached. It has come a long way since then.In one of the episodes I listened to a while ago, I forget which one it was, but Paul discussed advances with hair samples. He said within the past year a Dr. Green at UC Santa Cruz has been very successful working with tiny hair fragments. Even hairs that are significantly degraded. Cases have been solved using this technology. Cases where traditional DNA technology has failed to produce any type of DNA profile, they have been able to get whole genome sequences using Dr. Green's technique. They can then extract out the markers that can be used to search genealogy databases.
If those hairs still exist, to me it's a no-brainer PCSO should look into this technology. And as always, Jenson & Holes told the investigating police department they would put them in touch with their resources within in the FBI utilizing this technology successfully and they would provide the full funding for the testing.
5.) Bonus Just for fun, some cool things unrelated to Keddie:
• DB Cooper. DB Cooper left one thing behind when he jumped from that airplane, his clip on tie. Investigators have been able to obtain a DNA sample from it, so maybe one day soon will find out who DB Cooper really was. It was just amazing to me that the FBI literally only have 1 piece of evidence from him & they were able to get his DNA. Makes you think of Keddie & all those pieces of evidence. It seems impossible they can't get DNA off of something.
• "The Boy in the Box". His DNA was recently submitted for forensic genealogy testing. Hopefully that sweet little boy will get his name back soon.
