Sunday, 9 June 2013

In answer to anon#39

She WAS placed at the scene. She had been staying at the scene for a week. Finding her DNA at the scene would only have been relevant if there was context, such as her DNA combined with that of an unknown 3rd party. The procedure used for obtaining a surrogate reference sample was perfectly correct

The heel prick WAS subsequently used, compared with the profile recovered from the pillowcase and shown to be a complete match. Therefore the profile recovered from the pillowcase WAS Madeleine's. This is in the files - don't you people ever read?

''That profile was never used and nothing was proved''??

Seriously - read the file. The profile WAS used, was compared to those of Kate and Gerry McCann and showed conclusively that they were her parents. Again, this is all in the files, if you can be bothered to read them. Why is it important? It isn't particularly in this case, but in suspected abductions the possibility of abduction by a birth parent has to be considered and eliminated

Charlie's saliva - of course it's verified, The DNA was a match to him. This is in the files too.

I suggest you people read the files you are so fond of referring to. I suspect most of you have read the Gaspar statements and that's about it.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Leave a message. If you're a conspiraloon, we might publish it, but we reserve the right to take the piss mercilessly. Have a nice day.