Forensic Scientist's statement from the DVD
Laboratory reference
The lab reference of this case is 300655190
Objects received
According to the lab records of 7 August and 6 September 2007 the objects referred to in this report entered the FSS laboratory in Birmingham, having been remitted by the Police Science Laboratory of Portugal and by the Leicestershire (UK) Police, respectively.
Objective
The objective of my examination was to determine if down or hair was recovered from the Renault Scenic 59-DA-27 and, if affirmative, to determine if those may have come from Madeleine McCann.
Examination and results
Reference objects
I received [obtained] information from the pillow-case SJM/1, the tops SJM2, 4 and 5, and the hairbrush SJM/36 belonging to Madeleine McCann or used by her. The hair found on these objects was used in substitution of [in place of] reference samples of her hair, [which were] not considered to be authentic samples of her hair.
No hair was recovered from the pillow-case SJM/1 nor the hairbrush SJM/36. So the only hair used as comparison was the hair from the tops (which I assume means shirts?) Hair from a brush that was more than likely used by all the McCanns (just speculation here) but nontheless, not a reliable sample.
A total number of twelve [12] hairs or hair fragments were recovered from the tops SJM/2, SJM/4 and SJM/5. All of these appeared to be hair and not down, being mainly blonde in colour. One of the hairs was brown and distinctly darker than the other hairs, suggesting, at the least, that this was a hair from someone else.
The remaining eleven hairs/fragments varied in length from 4 millimetres to 45 millimetres [~1/8" to ~1,3/4"]. I could not conclude that all hairs were from the same person. So these hairs were used in substitution of the "reference" hairs - when there was no value to them???? If they had been from Madeleine McCann, then they are not representative/typical/characteristic of a sample of her hair, given the length of that seen in photographs of her.
Objects from the Renault Scenic - licence plate 59-DA-27
The following objects recovered from the scenic were subjected to examination:
1A, 1B, 1C, 1D,
2A, 2B, 2C, 2D, 2E,
3,
4A, 4B, 4C,
5A, 5B, 5C,
6A, 6B, 6C,
7A, 7B, 7C,
8A, 8B, 8C,
9 and
11 (2 objects).
There were more than two hundred hairs, down or fragments of hair and down. The majority appeared to be different from the blonde reference hairs recovered from SJM2, 4 and 5 which were unreliable samples, apparently to begin with. Furthermore, no blonde hair consistent with that seen in photographs of Madeleine McCann was found. So does this mean that this blonde hair was yellow blonde or red blonde or something different than Maddie's blond hair? What was the difference? It had to be a significant difference if the difference could be determined by a visual comparison with a photograph.
Approximately 15 hairs, down or fragments were blonde and fair, presenting a similarity with the reference material. Which, see comments above, were UNRELIABLE. All were of insufficient length to make a solid [definitive] comparison. Furthermore, they are too short to do mitocondrial DNA tests. I'm not sure I believe this given the forensics done in the Caylee case. This facility is supposed to be tops in the world and for all intents and purposes I would say our Quintana FBI labs would knock these guys out of the water - no questions asked! Folicle root material is insufficient for standard DNA tests.
Four hairs - one from 7B and three from 7C - were sent for Low Copy Number DNA testing. The results of those tests will be presented by my colleague John Lowe. So where are these results?
Conclusion
In the objects recovered from the Scenic, there were around 15 blonde/fair hairs similar to the reference hairs again, unreliable samples so why did they continue to use them for comparison???? from SJM2, 4 and 5. However, as it was not possible to do solid [definitive] or significant [forensically meaningful] tests it is not possible for me to determine if, or not, these could have been from Madeleine McCann. The forensics lab in the Caylee case put a hair under a microscope and announced that it was structurally similar to Caylee's hair. Why could this lab not do the same? Why were their samples so unreliable? Why could not the McCann's produce one reliable piece of hair from Maddie's head? It is obvious they brushed her hair, at least on occasion or it would not have been in pigtails.
The conclusions expressed in the present deposition are based on information available at the date of the examination. In the case that there are changes to that information, or additional information becomes available, it may be necessary to reconsider my interpretation and conclusions. That re-evaluation will be most effective when done immediately prior to any judgement. Well, yes, it is necessary to reconsider this guy's interpretation because, myself, as a lay person, am completely astounded by this person's audacity in writting such a report that is worth less than the paper it is written on.
A.L. Palmer
*******
None of the hair tested could be identified as Madeleine's.
And I wonder who started the "rumour," and why? that the FSS in Birmingham were not equipped to test hair.
