Maddie 'is with German family'

I found this regarding the DNA found in the McCann's hire car:

I need some help on the DNA analysis.

Can anyone tell me the following:

1. Re the 15 out of 19 markers. Do we know if any other family member shares all 15 markers - not just in theory but in reality?

2. Do we know whether the analysis could determine if the DNA came from a living or a dead body? If so, do we know which it was?

3. If the 15 out of 19 markers are consistent with it being Madeleine, what are the odds of it being someone else? Are we talking 10 to 1, 100 to 1, 1000 to 1 or more?

4. Do we have a record yet of the initial FSS assessment?


Beachy's reply:

Bomaris, precise answers to some of your questions would be impossible without actually having the results of the DNA testing in front of us, but this is what I can tell you:

For the purposes of this discussion, let us call the sample of Madeleine's DNA that was obtained from her pillow in Rothley or wherever they got it the "known sample." The DNA found in the Scenic and the apartment would have been "questioned samples."

Regardless of the number of markers you are testing, if the DNA in ANY of the markers in a questioned sample does not match the DNA in the known sample, then the questioned sample does not come from the same person who was the donor of the known sample of DNA.

I have not seen anything in writing to date, but I have been assuming that the FSS was able to extract 15 markers from the sample of DNA found in the back of the Renault Scenic, and that the other four markers were so degraded (by heat, sunlight, efforts to clean them up, whatever) that they could not be analysed. If they had 4 out of 19 markers that clearly were NOT a match for Madeleine's DNA, that would have been the end of it, in my opinion; the DNA from the Scenic could not have been hers.

I have read that the Portuguese require 19 markers for a conclusive result on a DNA analysis because under their laws that is how many markers are required for a positive match on a paternity test. This is more markers than I have ever heard of being required anywhere for forensic purposes in a criminal case. In the UK, 10 markers are tested, plus the sex of the donor is determined, and a 10:10 match is considered conclusive. In America, the FBI CODIS database contains 13 markers. Individual states in America are allowed to pass their own laws about how many markers must be tested before evidence can be introduced in court, but most of the 50 states use 13 because there is so much interface with the FBI database. Therefore, in America, a 13:13 match is considered conclusive that the questioned DNA and the known DNA came from the same person. Neverthess, if Portuguese law requires analysis of 19 markers, then that's what must be done. Period.

Regarding your specific questions:

(1) Only identical twins are born with identical DNA, and even in that case, every individual on earth begins to accumulate mutations to his/her DNA that may make it possible to distinguish even between the DNA of identical twins. There is a laboratory in Texas called Orchid Cellmark that claims it already can do this, but so far as I know, this technique has never been used in court.

The DNA of everyone on earth is at least a 99% match. Yep, that's right. The DNA of the most profoundly mentally disabled person who ever lived was a 99% match for Albert Einstein's. The DNA of the poorest beggar on the streets of the poorest city in the world, whoever that unfortunate soul happens to be, is a 99% match for the Queen's. Rather humbling, isn't it? (Note: Studies published in 2001 indicated that the DNA of all human beings was about 99.9% alike. More recent information, obtained from the human genome project, indicates that the accurate figure is probably somewhere in the range of 99 - 99.5%.)

The DNA of siblings is even more alike than that of individuals selected at random, which makes sense, considering that they inherit their DNA from the same two people. Within that 1% or less variation, however, there are literally tens of thousands of different combinations that make the DNA of any one individual unique from that of everyone else, including his/her siblings.

The FBI's CODIS database, which contains the DNA profiles of approximately 6 million convicted criminals, has been extensively studied. No 13:13 match of genetic markers has ever been found except between identical twins. There was a widely reported case several years ago in which a forensics examiner for the state of Arizona in America found a 9:13 match between two unrelated individuals, and there has also been a report of a 10:13 match between two related individuals who were products of an incestuous relationship.

Given the experience with CODIS, I think it is highly, highly unlikely (as in, the odds in favour of it would be one in the tens of millions) that one would find a 15:15 match on genetic markers between two different members of the McCann family.

Continued from previous post:

(2) As I have posted before, DNA cannot be used to determine whether a person was living or dead at the time the sample was taken. A DNA sample taken by swabbing the inside of the cheek of a living person one hour before death and another sample taken from the same person one hour after death would look identical under a microscope. What MIGHT be possible, and it would depend on several different things, including the degree of experience and skill of the forensic examiner and the quantity of DNA available, would be that a forensic examiner asked to attempt to extract DNA from some object that appeared to contain a substance that might be a bodily fluid - a piece of clothing, say, or a piece of carpet from an automobile - MIGHT be able to recognise the type of fluid and therefore tell whether the donor had been alive or dead. There are certain types of fluids - one is an exudate from the lungs that is only seen after death - that might be recognisable as such. In Madeleine's case, however, with so little material available, I am virtually certain that this would not have been possible, i.e., it would not be possible to tell whether the donor of the questioned sample of DNA found in the back of the Scenic was alive or dead at the time the DNA was deposited there. (3) If the forensic technicians were able to extract 15 markers from the material in the Scenic that were a match for the known sample of Madeleine's DNA and the other four markers could not be tested because they were degraded, there would be a high probability mathematically that the questioned sample of DNA came from Madeleine. Just to give you an example, at the time the forensic examiner in Arizona found the 9:13 match on DNA markers, the FBI said that the chances of that happening would be 1 in 113 billion. Well, that obviously isn't right, because there WAS, in fact, a 9:13 match, and there are nowhere near 113 billion people in the world. There is something called the "prosecutor's fallacy," which is an example of mathematical analysis called "binary classification" which shows that even 10:10 or 13:13 DNA matches are subject to error rates much higher than prosecutors sometimes attribute to them. However, whilst saying that the chance of an incorrect finding is 1 in 113 billion is clearly ridiculous, my opinion would be that the chance of two DNA samples belonging to different people if the results of the forensic analysis shows a 15:19 match would be miniscule - at least 1 out of hundreds of thousands, if not millions. It would not, however, be a smoking gun. Any DNA scientist will tell you that DNA is only one piece of the puzzle in any case and should be viewed in the context of all the other evidence. However, if FSS got a 15:19 match between Madeleine's known DNA and the questioned sample from the hire car, and 4 other markers were too degraded to be tested, in my opinion, that would be a powerful piece of circumstantial evidence. But in fact, I don't know exactly what they got. I don't understand what John Lowe is saying. This is the statement from him that I find so troubling: "Let's look at the question that is being asked: 'Is there DNA from Madeleine on the swab?' It would be very simple to say 'yes' simply because of the number of components within the result that are also in her reference sample. What we need to consider, as scientists, is whether the match is genuine - because Madeleine has deposited DNA as a result of being in the car or whether Madeleine merely appears to match the result by chance."

Source

I've been looking at some of the stuff in the link posted earlier and that included the following clip of the two dogs - I may have this wrong but it looks to me from this like both the cadaver dog and the dog that scents human blood both indicated positive findings in the apartment (they show the dogs in the apartment in the later part of the clip)

(this may take me a couple of tries)



peace
J

Reply to Gordi the drummer

you should really read the book i have referenced earlier in the thread, as it really adress all of the points you have been bringing up and seeking clarification for.

and since its obvious you already do know plenty about the case from reading your posts in this thread, maybe the viewpoint and step by step account of how the investigation took place as told by the case's main inspector would help you "slip" from your spot on the fence, regardless wichever side may you land on.

if anything is a detailed description of what the police actually did or not do.
no point in reading a million articles about maddie's case if you havent read that one.

of course im not going to say that everything is gospel, but the book, particularly the way it's written should appeal to any ats member



now on sidenote i have to ask the general population here -

why is it the psychics, clairvoyants, people claiming to have powers in general only show up, i mean flock to strictly to these big publicized cases of missing children? is it because that since its children it get's a sober tone and since no one joke's about missing children, these people with powers fear not being exposed as a fraud? i guess the genuine human emotion generated is so big that common people overlook what they would generally consider as crazy people,since that to find a missing child people assume an "i guess anything is worth a try" stance, is that it?

because if these people do have powers why dont they help in more police cases or mysteries instead of sticking to missing child cases where details are sketchy? the exception to the rule being any case involving celebrities that is.

They are now suing the person who wrote the book for £1,000,000.


Every time a child goes missing or is murdered, the Mc Canns suddenly appear in the news with a new sighting of their kid, or begging for donations. If they were working class they would have had the book thrown at them a long time ago.

reply to post by ProfessorT


In 4 years a child could speak German without an accent I think. How did this person know the girl was British?

reply to post by ProfessorT


Bull#!!
Everyone knows that she was killed by her mother. This is just another cover up. The parents runway from portugal when were made suspects. Just bull# again. A cover up.

reply to post by skjalddis


the full video can be seen here, dont know if it's possible to imbed due to not being youtube

sosmaddie.blogs.dhnet.be...

Originally posted by Gordi The Drummer
Hello again Dr!
Just a small point from your last post...

They were smart enough to possibly dispose of a body days before they raised the alarm, feed a story about kidnappers to the British press (who acted completely biased and xenopobic) and tell the police that they left apartment doors OPEN to make checking on their child easier and at the same time easier for an abductor to get in, ie. setting the scene for their version of events.

The last known photo of Maddie, which was later used as one of the press-release photos to publicise her disappearance, was quoted as being taken by the poolside, just 7 hours before her disappearance.
also, other holidaymakers are quoted as having seen Maddie alive and well, on the day of her disappearance, so I'm not sure where the "days before" they raised the alarm point comes in?

cheers
GTD

Like all fascinating conspiracies, there are reasons to believe the photos to be earlier and presented fraudulently or photoshopped,etc. Much of the evidence that backs up the McCanns comes from their friends. There is a theory that one of the McCann's friend's children was used in place of Maddy when she attended creche on the day. She was signed in and out quickly by Kate. All of these theories have been discussed on various websites.

i don't know if i believe the 'day earlier' theory but it would give the McCanns extra time to plan events and allow them to do things unobserved. If you believe she went missing on the day they said, Kate mcCann, Gerry and David Payne were the last people to see her alive.

I agree much of the evidence is circumstantial in this case which is why they have not been charged. It's just the weight of compelling evidence against them versus evidence for an abductor in my mind. The portuguese police held them as suspects for a reason after logically following this evidence. One day I hope we will learn the truth because of course non of us know for sure.

So many oddities in the good doctors and friends story. Here's 50 of them;
mccannexposure.wordpress.com...

Originally posted by thedoctorswife

Originally posted by AmberLeaf
Cadever dogs dont lie, they killed her and got away with murder.

I havent believed a word they said since i learned of the cadever dogs findings.

I remember that from a documentary, the dogs were convinced they could smell a dead body, and your right sniffer dogs dont get it wrong, however, it might not necessarily be Madeline, but whoa, what a coincidence if it was someone else eh? i mean, how many random dead bodies have you found in your street? it doesnt happen everyday.
My gut feelings is that Maddie is no longer with us, bless her soul, i just get the feeling that there was an accident.I dont think there was a murder.

They are from leicester, i used to live there, the freemasons in leicester are a scummy bunch as are many of the higher ups in the NHS there.

Originally posted by kingears
This subject is a tough one.

I myself have a 2 year old daughter. I would NEVER leave her alone in a hotel room, and I'm an unemployed man who has HALF the intelligence her parents (two doctors) are meant to have.

This is what I don't get. They are obviously intelligent human beings, so why would they leave their daughter in a hotel room in Portugal, with her two younger siblings? Something doesn't add up.

I personally believe she was killed, by accident. Whether it was something maddie did whilst she was unsupervised, or they did (just my opinion as there's no proof obviously) but the search for Maddie is a charade to cover their tracks. Like I said they are obviously two intelligent people who could, if needed, partake in a charade of searching for their daughter, whilst covering over any wrong doing they may or may not of done themselves.

I'm not alone in thinking they may (or may not) of killed/covered up their daughters death, this survey says it all ---


www.helium.com...

I hope that someday she is found alive and is reunited with her family, but I fear that this will never happen.

King

There is a story of some businessman who went out to the site of the disappearance and at considerable cost scanned the grounds for anomalies.

He found one and believed it to grave of Maddie McCann...which seems very likely.

Originally posted by kingears
This subject is a tough one.

I myself have a 2 year old daughter. I would NEVER leave her alone in a hotel room, and I'm an unemployed man who has HALF the intelligence her parents (two doctors) are meant to have.

This is what I don't get. They are obviously intelligent human beings, so why would they leave their daughter in a hotel room in Portugal, with her two younger siblings? Something doesn't add up.

I personally believe she was killed, by accident. Whether it was something maddie did whilst she was unsupervised, or they did (just my opinion as there's no proof obviously) but the search for Maddie is a charade to cover their tracks. Like I said they are obviously two intelligent people who could, if needed, partake in a charade of searching for their daughter, whilst covering over any wrong doing they may or may not of done themselves.

I'm not alone in thinking they may (or may not) of killed/covered up their daughters death, this survey says it all ---


www.helium.com...

I hope that someday she is found alive and is reunited with her family, but I fear that this will never happen.

King

I think you are absolutely right sir. The worst part is that she is dead, of course, but the next worst part is that the parents are wasting so many INTERNATIONAL resources that could be better used elsewhere. This just shows, if we are correct, the length the parents will go to to keep this under wraps. If they are willing to challenge all of the different international police agencies with their lies, they are likely willing to go even further. If they simply covered it up in the moment, and later realized it was not the right thing to do and there could be even more far reaching consequences worse than the accident itself, they would have stopped this search much earlier.

Since it has been so long, there is no way they can come clean now, IF I am right. I will admit that they could be telling the truth, but as so many have already stated, things just don't add up in this case.

Has anyone discussed the idea during the course of this case that Maddy awoke---and finding no one in the holiday apartment, went outside to find her parents.

I don't think the little girl's parents are guilty of killing their own daughter.

I think she was abducted by a pedophile ring. There is evidence that also points to this.

Originally posted by old_god

There is a story of some businessman who went out to the site of the disappearance and at considerable cost scanned the grounds for anomalies.

He found one and believed it to grave of Maddie McCann...which seems very likely.

Yes - I remember hearing about that on a radio discussion...

here, I think this must be it:

Madeleine McCann: Stephen Birch 'Finds Grave' Of Missing Child

A South African property developer claims Madeleine McCann’s body was buried near the site of her disappearance and that he has found her grave. Stephen Birch says ground radar scans he made with specialist equipment have been passed to Scotland Yard, who are conducting an investigative review of the case.

Item says that the McCanns have not commented on the claim, nothing new there then.

ETA - seems to be more info on this link
www.huffingtonpost.com...

peace
J

reply to post by badkittie748


Thanks for the response. I have sent you a personal message so as not to derail the thread/topic. I believe that Madeleine could still be alive. I look at the evidence of two supposedly intelligent Adults who are supposedly on holiday.

For you and other interested readers and posters - I continue my thoughts.

I would like to know more about the lives of the parents and some further background on where they took their holidays and at what times of the year etcetera. I acknowledge all the brilliant thinking in the posts within this thread but I am returning to my Police experience. The entire scenario is suspect - leaving Children unattended in a foreign country - alarm bells are ringing so loud I am sure my neighbours could hear what's in my head - I exaggerate to clarify the point. - and not to demean the issue.

Next I factor in the known evidence that paedophile rings are very secret and well guarded by the repugnant people who participate - on EVERY level. The next fact and NEVER to be dismissed EVER when thinking this issue through on a thorough level. Paedophiles and their co-horts come from every social strata - MOST importantly - the clergy - education - legal professionals - police - people in positions of authority and to Children particularly small Children EVERY adult is an authority. Do not for a minute think that only uneducated people are paedophiles do not think for a minute there is a particular genre for a paedophile. Remember - they have to lie and keep secrets and make their every move in a very calculated way.

I call suspicious on every level for Madeleine - her parents were very quick to leave her unattended in a hotel room in a foreign country and were very quick to leave the country when she vanished. I would have behaved in a very different manner - but then - I would NEVER leave ANY Child in my care unattended. Madeleine could be anywhere and that is because paedophiles are unfortunately everywhere.

My last point - if I truly thought a little girl sitting next to me was Madeleine - I would be making a citizens arrest and using my phone to call the Police - but that is just me - I like to use logic and when it comes to protecting Children I would rather make a mistake than let the opportunity pass with nothing but a blurry photograph.

Much Peace...Madeleine and every other missing Child...

I'm calling BS too but if I'm wrong then The Sun have gone and warned Ze Germans that somebody is on to them and will be searching for them! Nice one guys!

reply to post by MRuss



To my knowledge, there is no evidence of an abduction, only the say-so of Kate & Gerry McCann and they've been shown numerous times to be liars. Can you link me up to the abduction evidence?

As I remember, someone (heresay) said (or admitted or saw) that a man came and took a picture of Maddy the day before she was abducted. He was seen around the apartment a few times. Pedophile rings do this---they scope out their prey, take a picture, and send it to TPTB. If they like what they see, the abductor takes the target. I remember hearing that people saw Maddy the next day with a woman, who was known to be in a pedophile ring.

Here are some links: I don't have time to go through each one this morning to see which ones alluded to the above story, but I will try later:

edition.cnn.com...

www.crabbygolightly.com...

www.foxnews.com...

the-elite-and-child-abduction.blogspot.ca...

Originally posted by Staroth
reply to post by ProfessorT

 

Check this out from May 8. 2012 This witness claims she was with a German family plus 2 other kids as well. This may really be her!

'Groggy' girl seemed alienated from German family she was with at Cabopino campsite near Fuengirola

www.dailymail.co.uk...

Damn Germans! So meticulous and good at building stuff! Knew it had to be those industrious bastards that done it! They're almost as bad as those people who insist on using zero in place of the letter "o!"

To any Germans who may have been offended: I'm sorry that I used a stereotype of you to draw attention to the real criminals - Zero-Oh Swappers.

reply to post by Amanda5

Originally posted by Amanda5
reply to post by badkittie748

 

I would like to know more about the lives of the parents and some further background on where they took their holidays and at what times of the year etcetera. I acknowledge all the brilliant thinking in the posts within this thread but I am returning to my Police experience.

edit on 1-9-2012 by Amanda5 because: Spelling

that was all covered in the original police investigation, wich you can read here from the original main investigator coordenating the case.

goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.pt...

THE REAL VICTIM IS THE MISSING CHILD In a criminal investigation, knowledge of the victim is essential. A physical description is not enough. Her personality, her habits, other interests, her family background and her friendships allow a better understanding of the conditions in which the crime was committed. Knowing about her actions and her movements before her disappearance or her death also helps to determine the motive for the crime. The work is made easier when it's about an adult person with real life experience. When the victim is a child, the information becomes more piecemeal, and it's not easy to define a still evolving personality. All the information about her comes from her parents, her family, their friends, employees, neighbours and sometimes educators. It's not her actions that speak for her, but other people. According to statistics, including Great Britain, parents and close relatives are involved in the majority of cases of missing children. Certainly that does not constitute proof. A common sense rule, however, says doubt their word, without this meaning that they are to be considered as suspects. The information they provide must be cross-checked against other witness statements, in order to evaluate their veracity and credibility. The public in general, deeply touched by the misfortune that has befallen the family - they can all easily imagine the anxiety and pain that a mother or a father must feel in such a situation - take their side right away. The investigator, however, cannot lose sight of his objectives. He has to devote all his efforts to the discovery of the truth in order to bring justice to the only true victim: the child.