MA MA - ALBERT DESALVO, The Boston Strangler, 1960's

Discussion in 'Serial Killers' started by STANDREID, Jun 21, 2012.

  1. bessie

    bessie Verified Insider

    Messages:
    31,765
    Likes Received:
    1,196
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Help me out someone, cuz I'm feeling really dumb.

    Why was the body exhumed a second time?? Are the agencies not sharing?

    And if DNA didn't match in 2009, why does it match now?

    Is Suffolk County claiming an error in the 2009 testing? And if so, why is there no mention of it?

    I'm sure I've overlooked something obvious, so what the heck is it? :waitasec:

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/18/national/main302130.shtml
    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/12/us/dna-evidence-identified-in-boston-strangler-case.html?_r=1&
     


  2. wfgodot

    wfgodot Former Member

    Messages:
    30,167
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's either "exciting new advances in DNA technology in these last four years" or "Boston D.A. wanting publicity to set up run for future office."
     
  3. believe09

    believe09 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    28,094
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    LOL, wfgodot! This one is my vote.
     
  4. STANDREID

    STANDREID A slacker when slacker wasn't cool

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    409
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Don't feel bad - I'm wondering same.:findinglink:
     
  5. bessie

    bessie Verified Insider

    Messages:
    31,765
    Likes Received:
    1,196
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lab: Confessed Boston Strangler's DNA on slain woman's body
    I figured out what I was missing. LOL The previous exhumation wasn't done in 2008, it was in 2001!

    This is from the CBS article Backwoods referenced earlier.
    But below the article:
    The link even reads 2001, but I didn't notice it. And here's a link to a NYT article from 2001:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/20/science/new-clues-and-puzzles-in-boston-strangler-case.html

    Now it makes sense when they say the latest test came about through "new technology". :facepalm: :floorlaugh:
     
  6. STANDREID

    STANDREID A slacker when slacker wasn't cool

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    409
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I can see the first test being inconclusive and then later shown to be DeSalvo but I'd like to see an explanation of how one could exclude him and one include him. It is possible that the tests were from two different samples and if so then either DeSalvo had an accomplice or it was unrelated to the crime.
     
  7. STANDREID

    STANDREID A slacker when slacker wasn't cool

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    409
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Or, there's some sort of corruption either accidental or intentional in one or the other test.
     
  8. believe09

    believe09 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    28,094
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    thank you Standreid-I agree completely.
     
  9. bessie

    bessie Verified Insider

    Messages:
    31,765
    Likes Received:
    1,196
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In 2001, a forensic expert hired by the DeSalvo and Sullivan families through their attorneys, excluded DeSalvo based on a DNA profile obtained from DeSalvo's exhumed remains.
    LE, on the other hand, didn't have a "usable" DNA profile for comparison until recently. The DNA for that profile was extracted from the saliva of DeSalvo's nephew, obtained from a discarded water bottle. According to the July 11 NYT article, the testing was done by two private labs.
    Subsequently, DeSalvo's body was exhumed for a second time.

    DNA test ties Albert DeSalvo to Boston Strangler victim
    So to answer your question, different samples were used, but both were extracted directly from DeSalvo's remains. The latest results, however, are bolstered by the preliminary "familial match". IMO, the earlier results are questionable.
     
  10. STANDREID

    STANDREID A slacker when slacker wasn't cool

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    409
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If it's legitimate, the first result actually seems more reliable to me. Both sides got the result they wanted at any rate.
     
  11. STANDREID

    STANDREID A slacker when slacker wasn't cool

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    409
    Trophy Points:
    0
    At least we should have DeSalvo's DNA results on file now so we don't have to dig him up again.
     
  12. STANDREID

    STANDREID A slacker when slacker wasn't cool

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    409
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I guess we need a tie breaker now.
     
  13. STANDREID

    STANDREID A slacker when slacker wasn't cool

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    409
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I haven't seen any testimony either from DeSalvo or witnesses that indicated that he could have had an accomplice.
     
  14. STANDREID

    STANDREID A slacker when slacker wasn't cool

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    409
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I haven't seen any testimony either from DeSalvo or witnesses that indicated that he could have had an accomplice.
     
  15. STANDREID

    STANDREID A slacker when slacker wasn't cool

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    409
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Fifty years ago next month and after about a 12 week break, the killer was winding down his activities with his penultimate murder.
     
  16. STANDREID

    STANDREID A slacker when slacker wasn't cool

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    409
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If the "older women" murders were by another hand, that culprit had already ended his killing.
     
  17. STANDREID

    STANDREID A slacker when slacker wasn't cool

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    409
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The last older woman murdered was early September of 63 and there are some doubts about that one because of some variation.
     
  18. Dragonfyree

    Dragonfyree Active Member

    Messages:
    129
    Likes Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    43
    I thought I read somewhere or saw on TV that Mary Sullivan's family accepts the new DNA match.

    I still don't believe whoever the Boston Strangler was, that he murdered all the women, I think they're more unalike than alike, and the police just lumped them all together.

    The Patricia Bissette one is really different from the others. The care taken with her body and her peacefully (as much as you can be after you're murdered) laying in her bed.

    I think the older victims were different from the younger victims.

    I also don't know why there was only DNA in Mary Sullivan's case?
     
  19. STANDREID

    STANDREID A slacker when slacker wasn't cool

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    409
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The last Strangler victim, 19-year-old Mary Sullivan, was found murdered 50 years ago tomorrow.
     
  20. STANDREID

    STANDREID A slacker when slacker wasn't cool

    Messages:
    4,619
    Likes Received:
    409
    Trophy Points:
    0
    DeSalvo continued to perpetrate Green Man crimes for months more however.
     

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice