cool thx first one was pretty good

Look, I'm not really in the Avery is innocent camp, but Jesus. If they are contaminating one test, how can you trust the others? She contaminated the control. That is as negligent as it gets. Nothing can be trusted out of that lab.

Dateline just did a special on friday that was neutral and ID did theirs from the states pov last night. it re airs on monday.

Does anyone know exactly how Sherry got permission to deviate from protocol? I think it's in the transcripts somewhere and I would be willing to guess it's going to be a less than satisfactory answer. BRB


Edit: Welp, here's the deviation from protocol that approved the deviation from protocol.



lol

Edit to Edit: #leftoutofMaM

Did you watch?

No. If contamination happens they re-run the test, or call it inconclusive. They don't just randomly contaminate tests and ignore it.

IF the contamination happens (89 times out of 50K) and IF there is no more sample to test and IF the contamination is not of the actual evidence and IF the source of the contamination of the control is easily identified (in this case the lab tech doing the test) - THEN they can apply for a deviation from protocol.

All those conditions rarely happen but these are human beings doing the testing, and the tests are exceedingly sensitive, so yes it can happen. They are not infallible.

LOL at saying you can't trust any of the DNA results from this lab because contamination happened some tiny percentage of the time, just ridiculous. You may as well say courts can no longer use DNA evidence - the contamination happens in every lab some small percentage of the time.

The protocol for filing for an exception was to put out a form, have it be peer reviewed, and then approved by a supervisor

Thanks.
Luckproof Have you listened to this guy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql_EAI2JbUI

You're missing a step.

A wise supervisor, I wonder how that discussion went.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkYmmV7Oa-U

Not to be a nit but TH's blood was not found on the bullet. Sherry claims she could tell there so little DNA on the bullet just by looking at it that she did not run any other tests (i.e. for the presence of blood) as it would render the DNA test useless because she could tell immediately by looking at it that there was so little DNA that it needed to go straight into the amplifier.



Which by the way is exactly the same method she used for the key. Not test for blood just straight for the DNA and into the amplifier.

I watched the ID special and it was neutral if not in favor of Steve/Brendan. Plenty of strang in it(along with kratz).

Editor cleverly snuck Kratz's "One person responsible" line in.

I said blood but meant DNA.

Ohh My, So no DNA testing by the FBI on the bones.

http://imgur.com/a/MEvKj

Or for that matter any Photo's of the bones in SA pit, barrel or quarry.
Yeah Ms Zellner has every right to feel confident.

Plus No treads of Rav4 on the SA property or in the quarry. No tread marks in the quarry is terrible police work at best.

Warning this link may contain a conflict of interest.
https://wcca.wicourts.gov/caseDetail...nt=14&offset=6

Another parody.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5k1c...ature=youtu.be

Lost,

I watched the dateline special, not ID yet. But I will watch it tomorrow when it re airs.

so fraeyight are you from Wisconsin?

I am.

Negative, thanks for playing.

Yup GG WP & all that Jazzz....... I would hope you to post the article or paper your writing.
The least you could do is send a few $ to avery/dassy fund.

couldn't think of it.

You seem so satisfied with yourself with this response. Guessing a neighboring state like Iowa.

This isn't the Carmen Sandiego thread.

Yeah it was ok. He's a little too deep in the SA innocence camp for me.