AZ AZ - Allison Feldman, 31, Scottsdale, 18 Feb 2015 #3

[MissD]

I totally agree with you on these points, which led to "the perfect storm."

And, let us remember that LE said the suspect, though not normally violent, could become violent when confronted!!! As has been speculated here earlier, perhaps LE could tell from the crime scene how the altercation with Allison unfolded, and have had additional experience with him when they "confronted" him with some evidence.

What I don't understand is why LE let a month go by without letting the public know about his possibly having cuts and scratches (or words to that effect) on his hands and arms. Have they explained that?

BBM: Yes! I think they have insight as to the killer's sometimes violent behavior through interviews they may have had with others. We don't know who they've spoken to or interviewed. We do know they got search warrants and they were keeping an eye on someone. They may have spoken to friends or relatives, even obtained medical records.

On the scratches on arms and hands, I actually don't think they even meant that for the public. (Because they would know by then they were healed.) I think they were letting the killer or friends and family of the killer know this so they could know they (LE) had the evidence from under her nails.

Maybe?

 

[MissD]

Yes, DNA etc won't help with a hired killer, as far as eliminating someone else having hired/persuaded them to do it. This is partly why I am so confused by LE's statement. I have seen many cases where LE gets a DNA match through CODIS and still can't just go arrest that person. First they have to place him in the area/town, then determine that this person did not have any relationship/consensual contact, etc. In fact, they often trip up the suspect when he denies even knowing the victim, as then he cannot explain how his DNA got on her body, etc...

So it is unclear to me right now how having a DNA sample cannot, presumably, clear a person but can point to one...jmo

Well, if it's unclear to you, with the experience you've had with cases similar to this, you can only imagine how unclear it is to those of us who aren't that familiar.

To me....it seems logical that LE would clear someone as soon as they could clear them, especially someone who was practically a member of the family or was soon going to be.

 

[MissD]

OT- Yeah, some crazy years. Am separated now after a long marriage now, so who knows...

Have you filed a missing persons report yet?

:giggle:

 

[CocoChanel]

[/B]

Well, if it's unclear to you, with the experience you've had with cases similar to this, you can only imagine how unclear it is to those of us who aren't that familiar.

To me....it seems logical that LE would clear someone as soon as they could clear them, especially someone who was practically a member of the family or was soon going to be.

So, if they have DNA that does not match someone close to AF, it would not necessarily rule any close person in or out if there is the possibility they had HIRED the person whose DNA was left at the crime scene when the crime was committed, right?

 

[Pacific2011]

So, if they have DNA that does not match someone close to AF, it would not necessarily rule any close person in or out if there is the possibility they had HIRED the person whose DNA was left at the crime scene when the crime was committed, right?

I think you're right! Also, the DNA of another person at the crime scene -- whether hired to do the job or (more likely IMO) called upon by the perp to help him clean up after he realized what he'd done -- is definitely complicating the matter. JMO.

 

[armcha1r_detect1ve]

I'm confused, too as to why the camera picked up when the perp left but not when he entered. Could he have entered through the back or perhaps the garage? I don't think Allison would open the door at night to a stranger, either. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

I do. Is it possible that after shoo-ing the BF away she left and went somewhere and drove the perp back to the house with her? If so, said person may have been in the car, not seen through the car window, and gotten out of the car inside the garage and entered the house with her. Do we know if she stayed home all evening?

I also agree with another person that if she shoo-ed her BF away, and if in fact he tended to stay over, that she was possibly heading out to meet someone or planning to have someone over.

 

[MissD]

I do. Is it possible that after shoo-ing the BF away she left and went somewhere and drove the perp back to the house with her? If so, said person may have been in the car, not seen through the car window, and gotten out of the car inside the garage and entered the house with her. Do we know if she stayed home all evening?

I also agree with another person that if she shoo-ed her BF away, and if in fact he tended to stay over, that she was possibly heading out to meet someone or planning to have someone over.

Well, this is interesting because we have no idea when the BF left the day she 'shoo-ed' him off. Her sister, Kelly, who said he had told her she kicked him out to go home and study, didn't say what time that was. I'm not sure she even said what day. I always just presumed it was the same day. It is possible, however, that the surveillance camera next door might have caught him leaving, unless he left in his car out of the garage and that might not have been picked up on the cam.

It would be really nice to know if she was using her alarm system on a regular basis, because if she did leave that day to go pick up someone else, she might have armed it when she left and disarmed and reset it after returning home. I suppose it's possible the security company would have a log of her activities that day.

And I would imagine that LE has already checked their logs thoroughly.

Even though it is a possibility she might have intended to have someone else over to spend the night, I just don't see her as being that kind of girl. I think she was very committed to and in love with her boyfriend. If she had someone over, it might have been something that 'just came up' and not any kind of romantic interest at all.

I just can't see her cheating on her boyfriend. But anything is possible. Has anyone read what day and what time the boyfriend left after she kicked him out? This would give us a better sense of when the perp might have shown up.

jmo

 

[MissD]

originally posted by MissD


Well, if it's unclear to you, with the experience you've had with cases similar to this, you can only imagine how unclear it is to those of us who aren't that familiar.

To me....it seems logical that le would clear someone as soon as they could clear them, especially someone who was practically a member of the family or was soon going to be.

so, if they have dna that does not match someone close to af, it would not necessarily rule any close person in or out if there is the possibility they had hired the person whose dna was left at the crime scene when the crime was committed, right?

I mentioned that I was not experienced in these matters only because most of you here review and study many cases. I live here where Allison was murdered and that's why I'm here. Not for any other reason. You guys know more about DNA samples and all that stuff than I do.

When the questions are too complicated for me to understand them all I can say is that I really don't know the answer to that. I only know they haven't cleared anyone yet and they have DNA samples.

i think you're right! Also, the dna of another person at the crime scene -- whether hired to do the job or (more likely imo) called upon by the perp to help him clean up after he realized what he'd done -- is definitely complicating the matter. Jmo.

I can answer this one, I think. If the forensics team found 2 different DNA samples that were ON Allison the night she was murdered and one of them was someone she was close to and they expected it to be there, then I think there must be some reason they are not clearing the one they expected their DNA to be there. And yes, any additional DNA they found as a result of someone else coming in to help cover up the crime (if that was the case) even though we do not know who killed her, would probably complicate things a great deal for LE.

However, at this point no one has been charged, no one has been arrested. There are no official suspects. LE says they have the killer's DNA, and we don't know who the killer is.

How's that for a complicated answer to a simple question?

 

[Pacific2011]

Quick question:

Does the value of DNA deteriorate as time passes? I doubt that it does because I've read of cases where DNA is years old and can still be
used to ID someone.

However, I wonder if analysis of DNA using today's technology can reveal how recently a sample was deposited (for lack of a better word!) and also be compared to another sample in relation to how recently each was deposited. Just thinking that some older DNA might be mixed in with more recently-left DNA, which would also complicate testing. . . .

JMO.

 

[MissD]

Quick question:

Does the value of DNA deteriorate as time passes? I doubt that it does because I've read of cases where DNA is years old and can still be
used to ID someone.

However, I wonder if analysis of DNA using today's technology can reveal how recently a sample was deposited (for lack of a better word!) and also be compared to another sample in relation to how recently each was deposited. Just thinking that some older DNA might be mixed in with more recently-left DNA, which would also complicate testing. . . .

JMO.

Great question! I can tell you that this has also been a question on my mind since the beginning! Not being a DNA expert, I have researched your question fairly thoroughly and have found that it is very difficult and can take a long time to differentiate between DNAs in say, gang rape cases, as an example. They, the lab team, have a difficult time even separating the victim's DNA from the perpetrator's DNAs.

So, unless there was DNA on her body, say on her leg or somewhere, it would be a lengthy process to identify.

As for your question of "does it deteriorate as time passes", I'm sure that when a lab gets a DNA sample they preserve it in a way to ensure there is no deterioration. However, in the case of one DNA being at the scene hours or a day or two before a crime, I don't know if DNA exposed to air or sunlight or chemicals can change it or if a lab can tell which DNA was there the longest.

I do know that DNA can be destroyed by Oxygen Bleach. Not Chlorine Bleach. But Oxygen Bleach. And I think that someone must have poured Bleach on her body, maybe on her all over for all we know, but maybe they didn't use Oxygen Bleach.

I also have read that even when someone has tried to destroy DNA that it can almost always be recovered. But it takes time and sometimes it can even take months.

Maybe someone else can better answer your question, but that's what I've learned from researching the topic.

 

[MissD]

Regarding the white substance found around Allison's body, in my research I also found that sometimes killers use a calcium compound called Quicklime and they mix it with Caustic Soda Water.

It will cause disfiguring and can destroy certain DNA. This is done usually when someone doesn't want the body to be identified, and I've never read where anyone did it where they knew the body was going to be found.

But I think this killer was desperate to do whatever he had to do to destroy any evidence, especially DNA, that could connect him to the crime.

Obviously, there was so much blood everywhere that moving the body and dumping it somewhere else simply wasn't an option.

There's a lot of interesting information out there on the web about DNA and destroying DNA. But DNA is stronger than most criminals think it is. So it's really not that easy.

At least that's my conclusion from research I've done on the matter. (no pun intended)

imo

 

[MissD]

I have a very strong feeling that SPD is getting ready to make an arrest!

I hope it happens before her family goes back home to Minnesota on Wednesday!

I know SPD wants to be able to do this for Allison's family!

lease:

 

[cluciano63]

Once the DNA profile is obtained, that profile won't deteriorate. If they need more DNA tomrun again down the line, there is always that chance but generally we are talking years and storage of evidence should be better than in the past. But the process is so advanced now, they seem to be able to profile from the tiniest amounts now, even from old evidence. Jmo

 

[nancydrew71]

I have a very strong feeling that SPD is getting ready to make an arrest!

I hope it happens before her family goes back home to Minnesota on Wednesday!

I know SPD wants to be able to do this for Allison's family!

lease:

You really think so! That would be a shock.

 

[nancydrew71]

We had a case in Raleigh, NC, where the victim was viciously killed and she was raped. LE went around the immediate neighborhood requesting cheek swabs from the males so that they could rule out the men in the neighborhood since they had collected semen from the victim's body. LE explained that if there was no match, they were bound by law (and proper criminal investigative protocol and common decency) to destroy all non-matching DNA samples. Of course, if a neighbor refused to provide one, LE had to abide by the neighbor's wishes.

One male neighbor refused to give them a DNA swab sample and also acted strangely when LE went to talk with him & get the sample. He continued to refuse, so they did a plainclothes/plain automobile surveillance on him and obtained his DNA from a discarded cigarette butt, and it was a match. The case went to trial, and he is in the jailhouse for life.

Don't know if this may have been done in this case...

Perhaps LE is saying they have not ruled out the BF, even tho they have, just to keep the true perpetrator at ease... just a thought...dunno

Why doesn't the SPD do this!? The guy left on foot, so it doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out he lives nearby.

 

[Maggie2]

Why doesn't the SPD do this!? The guy left on foot, so it doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out he lives nearby.

That's not necessarily true though. He may have just parked a few blocks over.

 

[cluciano63]

If the person came intending to harm her, I doubt he parked right out front. Would not want neighbors to notice either an unfamiliar car, or one they have seen before.

 

[volcarm]

So, if they have DNA that does not match someone close to AF, it would not necessarily rule any close person in or out if there is the possibility they had HIRED the person whose DNA was left at the crime scene when the crime was committed, right?

Why would anyone hire someone to kill this beautiful woman...so disgusting.

 

[volcarm]

That's not necessarily true though. He may have just parked a few blocks over.

Wonder if le looked at other survielence videos in thr direction the killer was walking and could make out who the he was.

 

[OldSteve]

Once the DNA profile is obtained, that profile won't deteriorate. If they need more DNA tomrun again down the line, there is always that chance but generally we are talking years and storage of evidence should be better than in the past. But the process is so advanced now, they seem to be able to profile from the tiniest amounts now, even from old evidence. Jmo

Yes, just elaborating on what you wrote - once a profile is created, that's what is kept - it's like having blood work done at your doc's, one the written results are produced, the blood is no longer needed. Also a small amount of DNA can be replicated.. more at :