Dissimilar head hair on Q107 and extra DNA segment on the duct tape

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
seagull65

seagull65

New Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
2,667
Reaction score
0
I'd really like to hear more about the DNA that was found on the duct tape from the remains. Does this have its own thread yet? (I saw a few interesting posts on this subject on the thread about the heart shaped sticker residue.) (page 13 at this link http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFiles/Stories/Local/conwayrelease.pdf.) Was there DNA other than the DNA that matched the lab worker?)

Also, how about the "dissimilar head hair" found on Q107? (p 9587) (page 10 at this link http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFiles/Stories/Local/conwayrelease.pdf)

Thanks for posting any info about these here. :) (Unless these already have a designated thread(s) in which case please excuse me, mods. Thanks!) :)
 
Someone did post on another thread that there was another yet un-identified DNA sample but never substantiated it, after many repeated requests, with a link.

I personally never read or saw anything, other than the Labs own technician so tagged it as pure rumor and speculation unless I see a link or report.
 
cyberborg said:
Someone did post on another thread that there was another yet un-identified DNA sample but never substantiated it, after many repeated requests, with a link.

I personally never read or saw anything, other than the Labs own technician so tagged it as pure rumor and speculation unless I see a link or report.
Click to expand...

I saw this also, and I think the communication was about a segment of DNA they couldn't conclusively identify?

IMHO, if Caylee's DNA wasn't on the tape, then the DNA found was very likely transferred during collection or processing. It highly unlikely a fragment of any other DNA would hang on to the tape if Caylee's didn't.
 
I know what you mean Treeseeker, you would think Caylee's own DNA would have to be all over the tape.

Is the DNA evidence released so far only what was swabbed off the shiny side of the tape? (I take it.)
 
treeseeker said:
I saw this also, and I think the communication was about a segment of DNA they couldn't conclusively identify?
Click to expand...

that's what I thought, too. I guess there was nothing stated in the FBI report about it yet but some of our sleuths were looking at all those pages of raw DNA data? (I'm only guessing about this, I don't know much about it yet.) :)
 
It will be interesting to hear about any DNA they got off the adhesive side of the tape. At least I didn't notice that yet in the docs.
 
seagull65 said:
It will be interesting to hear about any DNA they got off the adhesive side of the tape. At least I didn't notice that yet in the docs.
Click to expand...

I found it, finally. Pg. 3/78 here:
http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFiles/Stories/Local/11-8634-8711[1].pdf

If I'm reading correctly, the adhesive side yielded the inconclusive DNA.
I still haven't found the emails discussing that they couldn't use the sample to exclude or include anyone.

I think this means the environment left the tape essentially blank, until it was collected.
 
I think I'm going to have to print out those pages of DNA data and start educating myself. Galloping off :bananalama:
 
just saw your post, thank you

darn it, the link isn't working for me. Can you tell me what page number it has (the big 4 digit number in the lower right)? :) thanks a million
 
seagull65 said:
I think I'm going to have to print out those pages of DNA data and start educating myself. Galloping off :bananalama:
Click to expand...

Good luck! If you'll venture into some of the old threads, several came up with really good, easy to understand sources.
 
seagull65 said:
just saw your post, thank you

darn it, the link isn't working for me. Can you tell me what page number it has (the big 4 digit number in the lower right)? :) thanks a million
Click to expand...

Go to CFNews13, then find the doc they've titled FBI: DNA Comparisons from the Anthony Family, pg 8636.
 
seagull65 said:
just saw your post, thank you

darn it, the link isn't working for me. Can you tell me what page number it has (the big 4 digit number in the lower right)? :) thanks a million
Click to expand...

Just add the "[1].pdf" to the link in your browser.
 
This is the link that mentions the partial DNA:

Q62/Q63/Q64-2 is the sticky side of the duct tape
page 8636 or pg.3 ( see attachment)

http://www.clickorlando.com/download/2009/0929/21146920.pdf

Two pieces of DNA were found on the duct tape attached to Caylee's skull, the same brand and type as that one found on a gas can in the Anthony family's east Orange County home, Pipitone reported.
But neither piece shows traces of Casey Anthony, according to documents released by the state attorney's office on Tuesday.
One DNA sample was traced to an FBI lab analyst who accidentally contaminated the outside of the duct tape during testing, the documents stated. But an FBI lab report showing a fragment of DNA represented by the number 17 was found on the underside, the adhesive side.
Click to expand...

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/21158117/detail.html

Note: Casey does not have an allele value of 17 in the same loci as the DNA fragment.

ETA****Sorry TreeSeeker for the duplicate. I was compiling the info for my post at the same time you were submitting.****
 

Attachments

  • ducttape.jpg
    ducttape.jpg
    20.8 KB · Views: 28
seagull65 said:
I know what you mean Treeseeker, you would think Caylee's own DNA would have to be all over the tape.

Is the DNA evidence released so far only what was swabbed off the shiny side of the tape? (I take it.)
Click to expand...

You'd expect that but it was stated in other posts that given the conditions of the crime scene that it is highly likely no original DNA is found. An example of a body exposed outside a week in a case resulted in no DNA -- and there was a confession. Prints are more likely on the adhesive than any surviving DNA.
 
oh I see, OK, reading over these things again, both the silver and the adhesive sides were swabbed (just catching up with you guys here :) ) I had forgotten the adhesive side was swabbed for DNA (yes I am interested in whether prints were obtained from the adhesive side, too, which we haven't seen yet....)

page 276-278 at this link re the DNA tests on the tape (p8635)
http://www.wftv.com/pdf/21147519/detail.html
 
Just read your posts, thank you guys so much :) Your links are great, thanks again
 
Is the dna found definitively human? The Anthonys had two dogs, IIRC. Also, would a scavenging animal leave trace dna?
 
I don't really see what the big deal is if there was other DNA found that didn't belong to the perp. Caylee was tossed in a dump site basically. It seems very plausible that certain pieces of evidence would be contaminated. God only knows what was lurking around those woods.. littered with all that trash.

Maybe I am way off base, but that's how I see it.
JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 113 more.
Total: 3,528 (members: 114, guests: 3,414)

Online statistics

Members online
114
Guests online
3,414
Total visitors
3,528
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,674
Messages
17,957,363
Members
228,584
Latest member
Vjeanine
Back
Top