Christine Jessop case finally solved

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Mendalla

Eastern Lowland Gorilla
Messages
32,054
Reaction score
14,464
But the samples could only be from 1984.....when the technology was not even used or known until 1986. Sequencing was unheard of. How would the police know how to store it? A plastic bag creates bacteria.

1995 is still nine years later.
The court that cleared Morin in '95 would have heard expert testimony. You can probably even find it online somewhere since unless a judge sealed it, it's a public record.
 

Waterfall

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,649
Reaction score
3,614
The court that cleared Morin in '95 would have heard expert testimony. You can probably even find it online somewhere since unless a judge sealed it, it's a public record.
"Science helped to convict him, and science exonerated him" said the judge.

Judge Kaufmen stated, The Ontario institute of Forensic Science hid the fact that some samples were contaminated in the lab, some were lost, and fibre and hair samples could not be supported by the science.
Despite these failures it still partly led to Morins conviction and also his exoneration.

 

ChemGal

One with keen eye
Messages
12,854
Reaction score
3,189
I get that part but did the funeral home snip his hair for the police back in 2015 and it was put into a geneology website hoping for a hit? It makes me curious that everyone was so surprised by who it was or that there was even a strong suspect after Morin's exoneration. Strong enough of a suspect that they took his hair when he died.....hmm, ah well,
I wonder, do you think there is a potential to set someone up with this technique.....not with this guy because they had his semen well preserved from 30 plus years ago, right?......but say with someone just accused of a robbery or a murder without rape?
She was murdered in 1984 and DNA testing wasn't available until 1986....what is the expiration date for testing semen?
I think it's just standard procedure for an autopsy, which are typically done for suicides.
There isn't really an expiration date. It all depends on if there's detectable DNA in long enough segments to still be useful. Frozen samples can be kept very stable. We have sequenced DNA from animals long extinct, and that was a while ago, there's even better technology now.
 

ChemGal

One with keen eye
Messages
12,854
Reaction score
3,189
But the samples could only be from 1984.....when the technology was not even used or known until 1986. Sequencing was unheard of. How would the police know how to store it? A plastic bag creates bacteria.

1995 is still nine years later.
We have been freezing cells for a very long time.
 

Waterfall

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,649
Reaction score
3,614
We have been freezing cells for a very long time.
The way the police preserve evidence even now, I doubt they would have known what to do. I've heard reports of womens rape kits not even being processed even in this day and age.
 

ChemGal

One with keen eye
Messages
12,854
Reaction score
3,189
The way the police preserve evidence even now, I doubt they would have known what to do. I've heard reports of womens rape kits not even being processed even in this day and age.
I think a fair bit depends on who is handling it. People in the lab would know more than the general police. They can do things like antigen typing ie. ABO blood types, so it seems reasonable to me that they would have frozen some of the sample.
 

Mendalla

Eastern Lowland Gorilla
Messages
32,054
Reaction score
14,464
The way the police preserve evidence even now, I doubt they would have known what to do. I've heard reports of womens rape kits not even being processed even in this day and age.
Let's face it, the rape kit issue has little to do with proper evidence handling policies. They know what to do with a rape kit. It's mostly about male officers and attorneys not taking a crime whose victims are mostly women seriously. That isn't going to be dealt with by changing how we handle evidence, but by getting police, courts, and politicians (who make the laws) to take rape seriously as a crime.
 

Luce NDs

Well-Known Member
Messages
46,566
Reaction score
3,609
Consider what power does to the mother mire ... the dirt on the globalization without care!

Expect pros and cons ... positives and negatives as positively critical emotions bust out! Pandora smatter ...
 

Waterfall

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,649
Reaction score
3,614
Frozen samples can be kept very stable. We have sequenced DNA from animals long extinct, and that was a while ago, there's even better technology now.
But can they get semen samples from long extinct animals for DNA testing?
Isnt there a difference from the longevity of bone samples and Semen?
Seems to me body fluids wouldnt be as viable as time goes on and as the Mclean article above mentions, the lab made alot of mistakes with the DNA samples.
Anyway. I will leave this for now....just thought something seemed off.
 

Mendalla

Eastern Lowland Gorilla
Messages
32,054
Reaction score
14,464
But can they get semen samples from long extinct animals for DNA testing?
Of course they aren't generally using semen. For animals preserved in permafrost, they have their choice of cells to use. For animals for which we only have bones (which currently includes extinct human species like Neanderthals), we extract it from the marrow or dentine (if the remain is a tooth). I suppose there could be semen in the frozen ones but I don't think it is what usually gets extracted.
 

ChemGal

One with keen eye
Messages
12,854
Reaction score
3,189
But can they get semen samples from long extinct animals for DNA testing?
Isnt there a difference from the longevity of bone samples and Semen?
Seems to me body fluids wouldnt be as viable as time goes on and as the Mclean article above mentions, the lab made alot of mistakes with the DNA samples.
Anyway. I will leave this for now....just thought something seemed off.
Here's the thing, if the DNA had degraded to the point of not being useful, it would have just given either a) nothing readable or b) a bunch of repeating segments, varying in length. Neither would be matches to people's DNA sequences beyond very short segments.
I trust those in the lab to have frozen some of the semen sample back when the underwear was found, as DNA isn't the only reason for doing so. Freezing it would have prevented degradationn.

I don't know what is done for semen samples currently, there may be ideal solutions to add before freezing. The absolute best signal to noise data isn't required though, identifiable is identifiable.

If they were comparing that to the genealogy study alone, I would be more skeptical. Comparing a DNA sequence of 2 people (I would assume they couldn't get a clear sample of just the semen without Christine's DNA in there) to the suspect's DNA and coming up with a match seems like a reasonable enough way to identify who did it.
 

Waterfall

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,649
Reaction score
3,614
Here's the thing, if the DNA had degraded to the point of not being useful, it would have just given either a) nothing readable or b) a bunch of repeating segments, varying in length. Neither would be matches to people's DNA sequences beyond very short segments.
I trust those in the lab to have frozen some of the semen sample back when the underwear was found, as DNA isn't the only reason for doing so. Freezing it would have prevented degradationn.

I don't know what is done for semen samples currently, there may be ideal solutions to add before freezing. The absolute best signal to noise data isn't required though, identifiable is identifiable.

If they were comparing that to the genealogy study alone, I would be more skeptical. Comparing a DNA sequence of 2 people (I would assume they couldn't get a clear sample of just the semen without Christine's DNA in there) to the suspect's DNA and coming up with a match seems like a reasonable enough way to identify who did it.
And yet mistakes get made all the time.....could be the courts and the public are being deluded into thinking DNA is foolproof and shouldn't be questioned when it still needs more tweaking.

 

ChemGal

One with keen eye
Messages
12,854
Reaction score
3,189
And yet mistakes get made all the time.....could be the courts and the public are being deluded into thinking DNA is foolproof and shouldn't be questioned when it still needs more tweaking.

With how small of samples we can work with now, it is more important than before to watch for contaminating samples. I am assuming here that the hair sequencing was done separate from the semen.
There is also a difference between sequencing and a DNA profile - where the sizes of DNA cut up in specific ways is looked at.
 
Top