This is another misconception.  The victim doesn't need to press charges for
your "heroine" to be arrested (since when is drugging and kidnapping someone
heroic?).  If the police have evidence a crime has been committed, they can
arrest the alleged perpetrator on their own authority, with or without the
victim's consent or cooperation.  No one needs to "press charges" for that to
happen.  Kidnapping is a serious Federal crime, and the FBI would very likely
make an arrest if they became aware of the kidnapping and had evidence your
protagonist committed it.

Bob Parsons
Forensic Chemist
Indian River Crime Lab

________________________________

From: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Beverley Bateman
Sent: Fri 7/10/2009 8:26 PM
To: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [forensic-science] Re: drug to put someone to sleep





Thanks everyuone.
Great suggestions and also the point about the saltiness.
I may change it to a margarita.
And yes, both drugging and kidnapping are illegal.
I'm hoping he doesn't press charges. :)

Off to drug the boss.

Beverley






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Folks -

I need a top notch GSR expert in the Los Angeles area. The main issue at
hand is whether it is possible and under what circumstances for a non-shooter
to  have GSR on their clothing, etc.  This is for a high profile homicide
case.

Please respond ASAP if you either qualify or know someone who does.



Sincerely  yours,
Sue
________________________
Sue Sarkis
Sarkis Detective Agency

(est.  1976)
PI 6564
_www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

1346 Ethel  Street
Glendale, CA 91207-1826
818-242-2505


"one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

If  you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
thank a  military veteran


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sue,

I'm not in the LA area, nor would I consider myself to be a "top-notch GSR
expert" (I haven't done any GSR work since the 1980's, and even then only
experimentally, not in casework), but I can tell you unequivocally that there
are lots of ways for a non-shooter to have GSR on their clothing or person.  A
few examples:

1.  Pick up or touch a previously fired firearm - GSR transfers from the gun to
the hand, and from there to clothing
2.  Lean on or sit on a surface previously exposed to a discharging firearm -
GSR transfers from that surface to your hand or clothing
3.  Walk through high grass in an area where guns were very recently (same day)
discharged, like a shooting range or other place where target shooting took
place - GSR transfers from the foliage to the person
4.  Stand near someone when they discharge a firearm (within a few feet of the
shooter ) - the GSR cloud from the firearm directly deposits on the observer.
5.  Be within the line of fire when a firearm is discharged - the bullet misses
you, but the much larger GSR cloud does not.

You can probably think of many similar scenarios.  It's easy to understand,
then, that the presence of a single (or even a few) GSR particles doesn't mean
anything except that the person at some time was in the same environment where a
firearm was discharged (either contemporaneously or previously).  It certainly
doesn't mean the person was a shooter him/herself, not at all.  Now if there
were a LOT of GSR particles on the person, that would tend to indicate they
either fired a firearm or were very close to someone else when they fired one
(as in #4 above). Otherwise, no conclusions can be drawn.  That's why most labs
have abandoned GSR testing - in most cases finding GSR particles doesn't tell
you anything useful (the person may, or may not, have fired a firearm - no way
to tell for certain).  It could help prove someone who claims to never have been
anywhere near a firearm is lying, but by no means can it prove the person was
the shooter.  This is especially true if the GSR test was qualitative only,
rather than quantitative, as is the case for most testing done today.

Ironically, while the most modern, advanced method (electron microscopy with
energy dispersive x-ray) is more specific (you can be absolutely sure it's GSR)
than the older bulk analysis method known as atomic absorption spectrometry
(there were other possible sources for the elements detected by AAS), the older
method could often give you more useful information because it was quantitative,
telling you not only that GSR was there but also exactly how MUCH GSR was there.
Knowing the relative amounts of GSR on different surfaces is useful in
determining how the GSR got there to begin with.  For example, a shooter will
have a much greater concentration of GSR on the back of the hand as opposed to
the palm (the back of the hand is exposed to the GSR cloud, but the palm is
pressed against the grip where it is protected from the cloud), while a
non-shooting bystander would have more equal amounts on the palm and back of the
hand (both exposed to the cloud), and a victim often would have more on the palm
(if raised in a defensive gesture toward the shooter), and a person who merely
handled a previously discharged firearm or touched a surface previously exposed
to the discharge would have some on the palm but none at all on the back of the
hand.  Typically, the modern method can't give you similar information (it IS
possible to use SEM/EDX quantitatively, but it's extremely time consuming and so
is rarely if ever done).

I can offer three possible sources of private expert assistance in California,
although I have no personal experience with any of them.  All list GSR among
their professional specialties.

Technical Associates, Inc. in Ventura - http://www.tai-labs.com/
R.G. Lee Group in Hayward -
http://www.rjlg.com/services/criminalforensics/gunshotresidue.php
Forensic Analytical Services in San Francisco -
http://www.forensic-sciencelab.com/FORENSICSERVICES.html

Good luck!

Bob Parsons, F-ABC
Forensic Chemist
Indian River Crime Laboratory
Ft. Pierce, FL


________________________________

From: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com on behalf of suesarkis@...
Sent: Fri 8/14/2009 5:11 PM
To: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [forensic-science] Gunshot residue expert needed - Los Angeles area






Folks -

I need a top notch GSR expert in the Los Angeles area. The main issue at
hand is whether it is possible and under what circumstances for a non-shooter
to have GSR on their clothing, etc. This is for a high profile homicide
case.

Please respond ASAP if you either qualify or know someone who does.



Sincerely yours,
Sue
________________________
Sue Sarkis
Sarkis Detective Agency

(est. 1976)
PI 6564
_www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/ <http://www.sarkispi.com/> )

1346 Ethel Street
Glendale, CA 91207-1826
818-242-2505

"one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
thank a military veteran

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Bob -

Thank you for the information.

About 10 years ago two investigators from the Los Angeles County Coroner's
Office conducted transfer experiments with individuals and the rear seats
of  police vehicle.  It's amazing how many people known to be free of GSR
were  not so once they came out of the police vehicle.

Also, the FBI studies that showed that high end vehicles,  MB, BMW and the
like have the same mix in brake pads and brake  dust as GSR makes one wonder
about the evidence which has been used in the  past.



Sincerely  yours,
Sue
________________________
Sue Sarkis
Sarkis Detective Agency

(est.  1976)
PI 6564
_www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

1346 Ethel  Street
Glendale, CA 91207-1826
818-242-2505


"one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

If  you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
thank a  military veteran


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sue, we use the LA Coroner's office to process our GSR kits. Their reports are
pretty inconclusive, though. Their reports say something like, "The test shows
that the person was in the vicinity of a gun that was shot." Sometimes the
bullet hole in the decedent told us that much!
We still use them, but I'm not sure why...
Blessings,
Jerry Godsey
www.godseysbostons.com
www.remnantchurchonline.com
www.omygodc.com
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: suesarkis@...
   To: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 2:11 PM
   Subject: [forensic-science] Gunshot residue expert needed - Los Angeles area




   Folks -

   I need a top notch GSR expert in the Los Angeles area. The main issue at
   hand is whether it is possible and under what circumstances for a non-shooter
   to have GSR on their clothing, etc. This is for a high profile homicide
   case.

   Please respond ASAP if you either qualify or know someone who does.



   Sincerely yours,
   Sue
   ________________________
   Sue Sarkis
   Sarkis Detective Agency

   (est. 1976)
   PI 6564
   _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

   1346 Ethel Street
   Glendale, CA 91207-1826
   818-242-2505

   "one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

   If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
   thank a military veteran

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I posted an article here months ago that the FBI no longer has a lab for
GSR. It is too much guesswork.
--- In forensic-science@yahoogroups.com, "Jerry Godsey" <omygodc@...>
wrote:
>
> Sue, we use the LA Coroner's office to process our GSR kits. Their
reports are pretty inconclusive, though. Their reports say something
like, "The test shows that the person was in the vicinity of a gun that
was shot." Sometimes the bullet hole in the decedent told us that much!
> We still use them, but I'm not sure why...
> Blessings,
> Jerry Godsey
> www.godseysbostons.com
> www.remnantchurchonline.com
> www.omygodc.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: suesarkis@...
> To: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 2:11 PM
> Subject: [forensic-science] Gunshot residue expert needed - Los
Angeles area
>
>
>
>
> Folks -
>
> I need a top notch GSR expert in the Los Angeles area. The main issue
at
> hand is whether it is possible and under what circumstances for a
non-shooter
> to have GSR on their clothing, etc. This is for a high profile
homicide
> case.
>
> Please respond ASAP if you either qualify or know someone who does.
>
>
>
> Sincerely yours,
> Sue
> ________________________
> Sue Sarkis
> Sarkis Detective Agency
>
> (est. 1976)
> PI 6564
> _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)
>
> 1346 Ethel Street
> Glendale, CA 91207-1826
> 818-242-2505
>
> "one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"
>
> If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
> thank a military veteran
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

This is about as conclusive that GSR testing can say.  Unlike in the world of TV
dramas, GSR doesn't say who shot the gun.  The test only indicates who has
residue on them.  For the reasons Bob pointed out, the only logical conclusion
one can draw is that someone has GSR on them because they came in contact with
GSR.

Before the test, the answer is "Maybe they shot the gun"
After the test, the answer is "MAYBE they shot the gun"

It's not much different, but it is a stronger maybe.

Sort of.

Adam

--- In forensic-science@yahoogroups.com, "Jerry Godsey" <omygodc@...> wrote:
>
> Sue, we use the LA Coroner's office to process our GSR kits. Their reports are
pretty inconclusive, though. Their reports say something like, "The test shows
that the person was in the vicinity of a gun that was shot." Sometimes the
bullet hole in the decedent told us that much!
> We still use them, but I'm not sure why...
> Blessings,
> Jerry Godsey
> www.godseysbostons.com
> www.remnantchurchonline.com
> www.omygodc.com
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: suesarkis@...
>   To: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 2:11 PM
>   Subject: [forensic-science] Gunshot residue expert needed - Los Angeles area
>
>
>
>
>   Folks -
>
>   I need a top notch GSR expert in the Los Angeles area. The main issue at
>   hand is whether it is possible and under what circumstances for a
non-shooter
>   to have GSR on their clothing, etc. This is for a high profile homicide
>   case.
>
>   Please respond ASAP if you either qualify or know someone who does.
>
>
>
>   Sincerely yours,
>   Sue
>   ________________________
>   Sue Sarkis
>   Sarkis Detective Agency
>
>   (est. 1976)
>   PI 6564
>   _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)
>
>   1346 Ethel Street
>   Glendale, CA 91207-1826
>   818-242-2505
>
>   "one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"
>
>   If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
>   thank a military veteran
>
>   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

I always thought that little burn holes are in the persons clothing that fired
the gun.


Brendalee 
C.O.A.L. T.E.A.M.
Cries Of  A Loss<>Touching  Each Across Maps 
THIS IS A CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION. THE INFORMATION COMPILED HEREIN, ALONG
WITH ATTACHMENTS,  IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, PLEASE CONTACT THE
SENDER IMMEDIATELY. ANY MISUSE, DISSEMINATION OR UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE OF THE
CONTENTS HEREIN MAY RESULT IN BOTH CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PENALTIES.
 

--- On Sat, 8/15/09, dutraa <leftoverboy@...> wrote:


From: dutraa <leftoverboy@...>
Subject: [forensic-science] Re: Gunshot residue expert needed - Los Angeles area
To: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
Received: Saturday, August 15, 2009, 12:35 AM


 



This is about as conclusive that GSR testing can say. Unlike in the world of TV
dramas, GSR doesn't say who shot the gun. The test only indicates who has
residue on them. For the reasons Bob pointed out, the only logical conclusion
one can draw is that someone has GSR on them because they came in contact with
GSR.

Before the test, the answer is "Maybe they shot the gun"
After the test, the answer is "MAYBE they shot the gun"

It's not much different, but it is a stronger maybe.

Sort of.

Adam

--- In forensic-science@ yahoogroups. com, "Jerry Godsey" <omygodc@... > wrote:
>
> Sue, we use the LA Coroner's office to process our GSR kits. Their reports are
pretty inconclusive, though. Their reports say something like, "The test shows
that the person was in the vicinity of a gun that was shot." Sometimes the
bullet hole in the decedent told us that much!
> We still use them, but I'm not sure why...
> Blessings,
> Jerry Godsey
> www.godseysbostons. com
> www.remnantchurchon line.com
> www.omygodc. com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: suesarkis@.. .
> To: forensic-science@ yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 2:11 PM
> Subject: [forensic-science] Gunshot residue expert needed - Los Angeles area
>
>
>
>
> Folks -
>
> I need a top notch GSR expert in the Los Angeles area. The main issue at
> hand is whether it is possible and under what circumstances for a non-shooter
> to have GSR on their clothing, etc. This is for a high profile homicide
> case.
>
> Please respond ASAP if you either qualify or know someone who does.
>
>
>
> Sincerely yours,
> Sue
> ____________ _________ ___
> Sue Sarkis
> Sarkis Detective Agency
>
> (est. 1976)
> PI 6564
> _www.sarkispi. com_ (http://www.sarkispi .com/)
>
> 1346 Ethel Street
> Glendale, CA 91207-1826
> 818-242-2505
>
> "one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"
>
> If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
> thank a military veteran
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

















       __________________________________________________________________
Make your browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 8.
Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at
http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Wheelie bins in the street is much easier,
for the serious criminal,
eg, Maria Marchese targetting Dr Falkowski's wheelie bin
to set him up for rape.
But interesting though.
Its about time forensic
"scientists" started doing some falsification
as part of the scientific ethic.

http://www.fsigenetics.com/article/S1872-4973(09)00099-4/abstract

Authentication of forensic DNA samples

Dan Frumkina, Adam Wasserstroma, Ariane Davidsona, Arnon Grafitb
Received 3 April 2009; received in revised form 11 June 2009; accepted 16 June
2009. published online 17 July 2009.

Abstract

Over the past twenty years, DNA analysis has revolutionized forensic science,
and has become a dominant tool in law enforcement. Today, DNA evidence is key to
the conviction or exoneration of suspects of various types of crime, from theft
to rape and murder. However, the disturbing possibility that DNA evidence can be
faked has been overlooked. It turns out that standard molecular biology
techniques such as PCR, molecular cloning, and recently developed whole genome
amplification (WGA), enable anyone with basic equipment and know-how to produce
practically unlimited amounts of in vitro synthesized (artificial) DNA with any
desired genetic profile. This artificial DNA can then be applied to surfaces of
objects or incorporated into genuine human tissues and planted in crime scenes.
Here we show that the current forensic procedure fails to distinguish between
such samples of blood, saliva, and touched surfaces with artificial DNA, and
corresponding samples with in vivo generated (natural) DNA. Furthermore,
genotyping of both artificial and natural samples with Profiler Plus® yielded
full profiles with no anomalies. In order to effectively deal with this problem,
we developed an authentication assay, which distinguishes between natural and
artificial DNA based on methylation analysis of a set of genomic loci: in
natural DNA, some loci are methylated and others are unmethylated, while in
artificial DNA all loci are unmethylated. The assay was tested on natural and
artificial samples of blood, saliva, and touched surfaces, with complete
success. Adopting an authentication assay for casework samples as part of the
forensic procedure is necessary for maintaining the high credibility of DNA
evidence in the judiciary system.
Keywords: Artificial DNA, Methylation analysis, DNA authentication, Forensic
science


ps
What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing.chat.ru/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine.

DNA Evidence Can Be Fabricated, Scientists Show    By ANDREW POLLACK
Published: August 17, 2009
Scientists in Israel have demonstrated that it is possible to fabricate
DNA evidence
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/d/dna_evid\
ence/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier> , undermining the credibility of
what has been considered the gold standard of proof in criminal cases.

The scientists fabricated blood and saliva samples containing DNA from a
person other than the donor of the blood and saliva. They also showed
that if they had access to a DNA profile in a database, they could
construct a sample of DNA to match that profile without obtaining any
tissue from that person.

"You can just engineer a crime scene," said Dan Frumkin, lead
author of the paper, which has been published online
<http://www.fsigenetics.com/article/S1872-4973(09)00099-4/abstract>  by
the journal Forensic Science International: Genetics
<http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/specialtopic/genetics/overview.\
html?inline=nyt-classifier> . "Any biology undergraduate could
perform this."

Dr. Frumkin is a founder of Nucleix, a company based in Tel Aviv that
has developed a test to distinguish real DNA samples from fake ones that
it hopes to sell to forensics
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/forensic\
_science/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>  laboratories.

The planting of fabricated DNA evidence at a crime scene is only one
implication of the findings. A potential invasion of personal privacy is
another.

Using some of the same techniques, it may be possible to scavenge
anyone's DNA from a discarded drinking cup or cigarette butt and
turn it into a saliva sample that could be submitted to a genetic
testing company that measures ancestry or the risk of getting various
diseases. Celebrities might have to fear "genetic paparazzi,"
said Gail H. Javitt of the Genetics and Public Policy Center at Johns
Hopkins University
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/j/joh\
ns_hopkins_university/index.html?inline=nyt-org> .

Tania Simoncelli, science adviser to the American Civil Liberties Union
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/a/ame\
rican_civil_liberties_union/index.html?inline=nyt-org> , said the
findings were worrisome.

"DNA is a lot easier to plant at a crime scene than
fingerprints," she said. "We're creating a criminal justice
system that is increasingly relying on this technology."

John M. Butler, leader of the human identity testing project at the
National Institute of Standards and Technology
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/n/nat\
ional_institute_of_standards_and_technology/index.html?inline=nyt-org> ,
said he was "impressed at how well they were able to fabricate the
fake DNA profiles." However, he added, "I think your average
criminal wouldn't be able to do something like that."

The scientists fabricated DNA samples two ways. One required a real, if
tiny, DNA sample, perhaps from a strand of hair or drinking cup. They
amplified the tiny sample into a large quantity of DNA using a standard
technique called whole genome amplification.

Of course, a drinking cup or piece of hair might itself be left at a
crime scene to frame someone, but blood or saliva may be more
believable.

The authors of the paper took blood from a woman and centrifuged it to
remove the white cells, which contain DNA. To the remaining red cells
they added DNA that had been amplified from a man's hair.

Since red cells do not contain DNA, all of the genetic material in the
blood sample was from the man. The authors sent it to a leading American
forensics laboratory, which analyzed it as if it were a normal sample of
a man's blood.

The other technique relied on DNA profiles, stored in law enforcement
databases as a series of numbers and letters corresponding to variations
at 13 spots in a person's genome.

From a pooled sample of many people's DNA, the scientists cloned
tiny DNA snippets representing the common variants at each spot,
creating a library of such snippets. To prepare a DNA sample matching
any profile, they just mixed the proper snippets together. They said
that a library of 425 different DNA snippets would be enough to cover
every conceivable profile.

Nucleix's test to tell if a sample has been fabricated relies on the
fact that amplified DNA — which would be used in either deception
— is not methylated, meaning it lacks certain molecules that are
attached to the DNA at specific points, usually to inactivate genes.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Is anyone using a Crime Scene Virtual Tour for reconstruction

or are you still using sketches & still photography?



Will any Stimulus funding help you upgrade to a better

evidence capture method?


*Also, do we have a group set up on LinkedIn by any chance?

This may be a good forum for our discussions as well, as there

are sections w/in the groups for Job Post, News, and then just

Q&A.  Just a thought!



Thank You!

Jennifer Schaus



Jennifer Schaus & Associates
Washington, DC
http://www.JenniferSchaus.com
+ 1 - 2 0 2 - 3 6 5 - 0 5 9 8 DIREC
GSA Schedules * Business Financing






To: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
From: bakerd@...
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:30:22 -0400
Subject: [forensic-science] Updated Conference and Training List - Digital
Forensics





All,
The updated conference and training list is maintained on the
Forensics Wiki website at the following URL:
http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Upcoming_events

Dave B.
----------------------------------------------------------
David W. Baker bakerd@...
Lead Information Systems Engineer
G122 - Information Analysis and Engineering (703) 983-3658
The MITRE Corporation (703) 983-5864 (F)
Mailstop T730 (877) 682-0632 (P)
7515 Colshire Drive McLean, VA, 22102
----------------------------------------------------------


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Still using sketches and stills.  We've looked at some of the "3D" mapping
systems, but they are awfully expensive.  So, yes, if we could find some
funding that would certainly help.

As for LinkedIn, I've set up a Forensic Science group there as well.  So
anyone who is on LinkedIn is welcome to join.  I don't know much about
LinkedIn, but hopefully the group doesn't fill up with spam.


Regards,

Daryl

----------------------------------------------
Daryl W. Clemens
Editor, Crime & Clues
http://www.crimeandclues.com

2400 Eastern SE
Grand Rapids, MI  49507

dclemens@...
----------------------------------------------


On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 4:12 AM, jennifer schaus <jschaus@...>wrote:

>
>
>
> Is anyone using a Crime Scene Virtual Tour for reconstruction
>
> or are you still using sketches & still photography?
>
> Will any Stimulus funding help you upgrade to a better
>
> evidence capture method?
>
> *Also, do we have a group set up on LinkedIn by any chance?
>
> This may be a good forum for our discussions as well, as there
>
> are sections w/in the groups for Job Post, News, and then just
>
> Q&A. Just a thought!
>
> Thank You!
>
> Jennifer Schaus
>
> Jennifer Schaus & Associates
> Washington, DC
> http://www.JenniferSchaus.com
> + 1 - 2 0 2 - 3 6 5 - 0 5 9 8 DIREC
> GSA Schedules * Business Financing
>
> To: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com <forensic-science%40yahoogroups.com>
> From: bakerd@... <bakerd%40mitre.org>
> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:30:22 -0400
> Subject: [forensic-science] Updated Conference and Training List - Digital
> Forensics
>
> All,
> The updated conference and training list is maintained on the
> Forensics Wiki website at the following URL:
> http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Upcoming_events
>
> Dave B.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> David W. Baker bakerd@... <bakerd%40mitre.org>
> Lead Information Systems Engineer
> G122 - Information Analysis and Engineering (703) 983-3658
> The MITRE Corporation (703) 983-5864 (F)
> Mailstop T730 (877) 682-0632 (P)
> 7515 Colshire Drive McLean, VA, 22102
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

We use CrimeZone. It is a pretty good program. Right now, we measure all of the
points of reference with a laser measure (don't get excited, we bought it at
Sears!), then I hand enter all of the points into CrimeZone. The 3D stuff is
incredible. The 3D body poser allows me to poisition the victim (including
height and weight) in the exact position they were in. Very cool. It really adds
a lot to the understanding of the scene. We only use it for major crimes because
it is a lot of work. CrimeZone is about $800 I believe, but it is worth the
money. It will also do traffic accidents, including animation. Since we don't do
traffic accidents (hallelujah!) I haven't had to use it for that.

I am hoping to get a Leica Geosystems scanner out of next year's Homeland
Security grant. We'll see.
Blessings,
Jerry Godsey
www.godseysbostons.com
www.remnantchurchonline.com
www.omygodc.com

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Daryl W. Clemens
   To: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 8:54 AM
   Subject: Re: [forensic-science] Is anyone using Digital Media for Crime Scene
Reconstruction?


     Still using sketches and stills. We've looked at some of the "3D" mapping
   systems, but they are awfully expensive. So, yes, if we could find some
   funding that would certainly help.

   As for LinkedIn, I've set up a Forensic Science group there as well. So
   anyone who is on LinkedIn is welcome to join. I don't know much about
   LinkedIn, but hopefully the group doesn't fill up with spam.

   Regards,

   Daryl

   ----------------------------------------------
   Daryl W. Clemens
   Editor, Crime & Clues
   http://www.crimeandclues.com

   2400 Eastern SE
   Grand Rapids, MI 49507

   dclemens@...
   ----------------------------------------------

   On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 4:12 AM, jennifer schaus <jschaus@...>wrote:

   >
   >
   >
   > Is anyone using a Crime Scene Virtual Tour for reconstruction
   >
   > or are you still using sketches & still photography?
   >
   > Will any Stimulus funding help you upgrade to a better
   >
   > evidence capture method?
   >
   > *Also, do we have a group set up on LinkedIn by any chance?
   >
   > This may be a good forum for our discussions as well, as there
   >
   > are sections w/in the groups for Job Post, News, and then just
   >
   > Q&A. Just a thought!
   >
   > Thank You!
   >
   > Jennifer Schaus
   >
   > Jennifer Schaus & Associates
   > Washington, DC
   > http://www.JenniferSchaus.com
   > + 1 - 2 0 2 - 3 6 5 - 0 5 9 8 DIREC
   > GSA Schedules * Business Financing
   >
   > To: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com <forensic-science%40yahoogroups.com>
   > From: bakerd@... <bakerd%40mitre.org>
   > Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:30:22 -0400
   > Subject: [forensic-science] Updated Conference and Training List - Digital
   > Forensics
   >
   > All,
   > The updated conference and training list is maintained on the
   > Forensics Wiki website at the following URL:
   > http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Upcoming_events
   >
   > Dave B.
   > ----------------------------------------------------------
   > David W. Baker bakerd@... <bakerd%40mitre.org>
   > Lead Information Systems Engineer
   > G122 - Information Analysis and Engineering (703) 983-3658
   > The MITRE Corporation (703) 983-5864 (F)
   > Mailstop T730 (877) 682-0632 (P)
   > 7515 Colshire Drive McLean, VA, 22102
   > ----------------------------------------------------------
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >
   >
   >

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks, Jerry.  I'll have to look at Sears.. I did not know they carried
such items.

Are you familiar with this software - www.Crime-Scene-Vr.com
<http://www.crime-scene-vr.com/>   by any chance?

Seems to be a lot on the market these days and I'm just evaluating options.

Thanks!



   _____

From: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:forensic-science@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Godsey
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 7:49 PM
To: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [forensic-science] Is anyone using Digital Media for Crime
Scene Reconstruction?





We use CrimeZone. It is a pretty good program. Right now, we measure all of
the points of reference with a laser measure (don't get excited, we bought
it at Sears!), then I hand enter all of the points into CrimeZone. The 3D
stuff is incredible. The 3D body poser allows me to poisition the victim
(including height and weight) in the exact position they were in. Very cool.
It really adds a lot to the understanding of the scene. We only use it for
major crimes because it is a lot of work. CrimeZone is about $800 I believe,
but it is worth the money. It will also do traffic accidents, including
animation. Since we don't do traffic accidents (hallelujah!) I haven't had
to use it for that.

I am hoping to get a Leica Geosystems scanner out of next year's Homeland
Security grant. We'll see.
Blessings,
Jerry Godsey
www.godseysbostons.com
www.remnantchurchonline.com
www.omygodc.com

----- Original Message -----
From: Daryl W. Clemens
To: forensic-science@ <mailto:forensic-science%40yahoogroups.com>
yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 8:54 AM
Subject: Re: [forensic-science] Is anyone using Digital Media for Crime
Scene Reconstruction?

Still using sketches and stills. We've looked at some of the "3D" mapping
systems, but they are awfully expensive. So, yes, if we could find some
funding that would certainly help.

As for LinkedIn, I've set up a Forensic Science group there as well. So
anyone who is on LinkedIn is welcome to join. I don't know much about
LinkedIn, but hopefully the group doesn't fill up with spam.

Regards,

Daryl

----------------------------------------------
Daryl W. Clemens
Editor, Crime & Clues
http://www.crimeand <http://www.crimeandclues.com> clues.com

2400 Eastern SE
Grand Rapids, MI 49507

dclemens@crimeandcl <mailto:dclemens%40crimeandclues.com> ues.com
----------------------------------------------

On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 4:12 AM, jennifer schaus <jschaus@hotmail.
<mailto:jschaus%40hotmail.com> com>wrote:

>
>
>
> Is anyone using a Crime Scene Virtual Tour for reconstruction
>
> or are you still using sketches & still photography?
>
> Will any Stimulus funding help you upgrade to a better
>
> evidence capture method?
>
> *Also, do we have a group set up on LinkedIn by any chance?
>
> This may be a good forum for our discussions as well, as there
>
> are sections w/in the groups for Job Post, News, and then just
>
> Q&A. Just a thought!
>
> Thank You!
>
> Jennifer Schaus
>
> Jennifer Schaus & Associates
> Washington, DC
> http://www.Jennifer <http://www.JenniferSchaus.com> Schaus.com
> + 1 - 2 0 2 - 3 6 5 - 0 5 9 8 DIREC
> GSA Schedules * Business Financing
>
> To: forensic-science@ <mailto:forensic-science%40yahoogroups.com>
yahoogroups.com <forensic-science%40yahoogroups.com>
> From: bakerd@mitre. <mailto:bakerd%40mitre.org> org <bakerd%40mitre.org>
> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:30:22 -0400
> Subject: [forensic-science] Updated Conference and Training List - Digital
> Forensics
>
> All,
> The updated conference and training list is maintained on the
> Forensics Wiki website at the following URL:
> http://www.forensic <http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Upcoming_events>
swiki.org/wiki/Upcoming_events
>
> Dave B.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> David W. Baker bakerd@mitre. <mailto:bakerd%40mitre.org> org
<bakerd%40mitre.org>
> Lead Information Systems Engineer
> G122 - Information Analysis and Engineering (703) 983-3658
> The MITRE Corporation (703) 983-5864 (F)
> Mailstop T730 (877) 682-0632 (P)
> 7515 Colshire Drive McLean, VA, 22102
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Daryl,



LinkedIn is fairly closed - meaning there is no spam.  Just a way to
organize discussions and posts/topics.  Thanks.



   _____

From: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:forensic-science@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Daryl W. Clemens
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 11:55 AM
To: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [forensic-science] Is anyone using Digital Media for Crime
Scene Reconstruction?





Still using sketches and stills. We've looked at some of the "3D" mapping
systems, but they are awfully expensive. So, yes, if we could find some
funding that would certainly help.

As for LinkedIn, I've set up a Forensic Science group there as well. So
anyone who is on LinkedIn is welcome to join. I don't know much about
LinkedIn, but hopefully the group doesn't fill up with spam.

Regards,

Daryl

----------------------------------------------
Daryl W. Clemens
Editor, Crime & Clues
http://www.crimeand <http://www.crimeandclues.com> clues.com

2400 Eastern SE
Grand Rapids, MI 49507

dclemens@crimeandcl <mailto:dclemens%40crimeandclues.com> ues.com
----------------------------------------------

On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 4:12 AM, jennifer schaus <jschaus@hotmail.
<mailto:jschaus%40hotmail.com> com>wrote:

>
>
>
> Is anyone using a Crime Scene Virtual Tour for reconstruction
>
> or are you still using sketches & still photography?
>
> Will any Stimulus funding help you upgrade to a better
>
> evidence capture method?
>
> *Also, do we have a group set up on LinkedIn by any chance?
>
> This may be a good forum for our discussions as well, as there
>
> are sections w/in the groups for Job Post, News, and then just
>
> Q&A. Just a thought!
>
> Thank You!
>
> Jennifer Schaus
>
> Jennifer Schaus & Associates
> Washington, DC
> http://www.Jennifer <http://www.JenniferSchaus.com> Schaus.com
> + 1 - 2 0 2 - 3 6 5 - 0 5 9 8 DIREC
> GSA Schedules * Business Financing
>
> To: forensic-science@ <mailto:forensic-science%40yahoogroups.com>
yahoogroups.com <forensic-science%40yahoogroups.com>
> From: bakerd@mitre. <mailto:bakerd%40mitre.org> org <bakerd%40mitre.org>
> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:30:22 -0400
> Subject: [forensic-science] Updated Conference and Training List - Digital
> Forensics
>
> All,
> The updated conference and training list is maintained on the
> Forensics Wiki website at the following URL:
> http://www.forensic <http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Upcoming_events>
swiki.org/wiki/Upcoming_events
>
> Dave B.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> David W. Baker bakerd@mitre. <mailto:bakerd%40mitre.org> org
<bakerd%40mitre.org>
> Lead Information Systems Engineer
> G122 - Information Analysis and Engineering (703) 983-3658
> The MITRE Corporation (703) 983-5864 (F)
> Mailstop T730 (877) 682-0632 (P)
> 7515 Colshire Drive McLean, VA, 22102
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jennifer, my unit looked at Crime-Scene VR before I got into the unit. The
consensus was that it is incredible software, but very pricey, and had a steep
learning curve. That's what I was told...
As far as Sears, what we have from them is a fancy laser measurer. We still are
writing the measurements on a sketch pad wth XY coordinates and then
transferring the coordinates to Crime Zone. Very time consuming, but the
drawings are awesome.
My team and I investigated an officer involved shooting in our county. With the
drawings we did you could reconstruct the scene within an inch or so. That
includes the squad cars, the position of the decedent, shell casings and taser
cartridges.
The 3D reconstructions came out really well. I love the software...
Blessings,
Jerry Godsey
www.godseysbostons.com
www.remnantchurchonline.com
www.omygodc.com
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Jennifer Schaus
   To: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 4:59 PM
   Subject: RE: [forensic-science] Is anyone using Digital Media for Crime Scene
Reconstruction?


     Thanks, Jerry. I'll have to look at Sears.. I did not know they carried
   such items.

   Are you familiar with this software - www.Crime-Scene-Vr.com
   <http://www.crime-scene-vr.com/> by any chance?

   Seems to be a lot on the market these days and I'm just evaluating options.

   Thanks!

   _____

   From: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
   [mailto:forensic-science@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Godsey
   Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 7:49 PM
   To: forensic-science@yahoogroups.com
   Subject: Re: [forensic-science] Is anyone using Digital Media for Crime
   Scene Reconstruction?

   We use CrimeZone. It is a pretty good program. Right now, we measure all of
   the points of reference with a laser measure (don't get excited, we bought
   it at Sears!), then I hand enter all of the points into CrimeZone. The 3D
   stuff is incredible. The 3D body poser allows me to poisition the victim
   (including height and weight) in the exact position they were in. Very cool.
   It really adds a lot to the understanding of the scene. We only use it for
   major crimes because it is a lot of work. CrimeZone is about $800 I believe,
   but it is worth the money. It will also do traffic accidents, including
   animation. Since we don't do traffic accidents (hallelujah!) I haven't had
   to use it for that.

   I am hoping to get a Leica Geosystems scanner out of next year's Homeland
   Security grant. We'll see.
   Blessings,
   Jerry Godsey
   www.godseysbostons.com
   www.remnantchurchonline.com
   www.omygodc.com

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Daryl W. Clemens
   To: forensic-science@ <mailto:forensic-science%40yahoogroups.com>
   yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 8:54 AM
   Subject: Re: [forensic-science] Is anyone using Digital Media for Crime
   Scene Reconstruction?

   Still using sketches and stills. We've looked at some of the "3D" mapping
   systems, but they are awfully expensive. So, yes, if we could find some
   funding that would certainly help.

   As for LinkedIn, I've set up a Forensic Science group there as well. So
   anyone who is on LinkedIn is welcome to join. I don't know much about
   LinkedIn, but hopefully the group doesn't fill up with spam.

   Regards,

   Daryl

   ----------------------------------------------
   Daryl W. Clemens
   Editor, Crime & Clues
   http://www.crimeand <http://www.crimeandclues.com> clues.com

   2400 Eastern SE
   Grand Rapids, MI 49507

   dclemens@crimeandcl <mailto:dclemens%40crimeandclues.com> ues.com
   ----------------------------------------------

   On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 4:12 AM, jennifer schaus <jschaus@hotmail.
   <mailto:jschaus%40hotmail.com> com>wrote:

   >
   >
   >
   > Is anyone using a Crime Scene Virtual Tour for reconstruction
   >
   > or are you still using sketches & still photography?
   >
   > Will any Stimulus funding help you upgrade to a better
   >
   > evidence capture method?
   >
   > *Also, do we have a group set up on LinkedIn by any chance?
   >
   > This may be a good forum for our discussions as well, as there
   >
   > are sections w/in the groups for Job Post, News, and then just
   >
   > Q&A. Just a thought!
   >
   > Thank You!
   >
   > Jennifer Schaus
   >
   > Jennifer Schaus & Associates
   > Washington, DC
   > http://www.Jennifer <http://www.JenniferSchaus.com> Schaus.com
   > + 1 - 2 0 2 - 3 6 5 - 0 5 9 8 DIREC
   > GSA Schedules * Business Financing
   >
   > To: forensic-science@ <mailto:forensic-science%40yahoogroups.com>
   yahoogroups.com <forensic-science%40yahoogroups.com>
   > From: bakerd@mitre. <mailto:bakerd%40mitre.org> org <bakerd%40mitre.org>
   > Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:30:22 -0400
   > Subject: [forensic-science] Updated Conference and Training List - Digital
   > Forensics
   >
   > All,
   > The updated conference and training list is maintained on the
   > Forensics Wiki website at the following URL:
   > http://www.forensic <http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Upcoming_events>
   swiki.org/wiki/Upcoming_events
   >
   > Dave B.
   > ----------------------------------------------------------
   > David W. Baker bakerd@mitre. <mailto:bakerd%40mitre.org> org
   <bakerd%40mitre.org>
   > Lead Information Systems Engineer
   > G122 - Information Analysis and Engineering (703) 983-3658
   > The MITRE Corporation (703) 983-5864 (F)
   > Mailstop T730 (877) 682-0632 (P)
   > 7515 Colshire Drive McLean, VA, 22102
   > ----------------------------------------------------------
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >
   >
   >

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Has anyone else observed false positives with water using RSID saliva test?

Dear johnatkins63,
We got this letter from Independent Forensics in June of this year:
"This letter is to notify you of the recall of RSID-Saliva™ lots# 030309A1 and
032509A1.  On behalf of Independent Forensics, we would like to express our
deepest apologies for any inconvenience you have experienced due to our recall
of RSID-Saliva™ lots:  030309A1 and 032509A1.  When a problem of this nature
occurs, we want to know about it and thank you for bringing it to our attention.
We are sorry that the shipment of goods purchase order #09-XXXXXX  that you
received shipped on 4/XX/2009 did not perform up to standards.
The product we shipped, RSID-Saliva™ lots# 030309A1 and 032509A1 did not meet
the very high standards our customers have come to expect and should continue to
demand.  The problems we, and users, are having with RSID-Saliva™ lot 030309A1
and 032509A1 are with ghost bands seen with negative controls.  These results
have been reproduced in our hands and are not a function of poor technique or
contravened protocols.  We have traced the problem to a production issue
involving a component of the cassette, which we can assure you has been fixed
and will NOT happen again.
We will meet the highest quality standards because protecting our reputation for
delivering the best product on the market is a key priority. Again, we apologize
for our error and regret any inconvenience caused as a result.
We have brought on additional staff to expedite the production of a replacement
order at our expense and guarantee its delivery during the week of June 29- July
3.  In the meantime, please immediately dispose of all components associated
with RSID-Saliva™ lots 030309A1 and 032509A1.
If there is anything else that we can do to minimize your inconvenience in
regard to this matter, please don’t hesitate to contact us."

Ed Jones
Ventura Sheriff's Dept. Forensic Sciences Laboratory

>>> johnatkins63 <johnatkins63@...> 8/25/2009 12:05 AM >>>

Has anyone else observed false positives with water using RSID saliva test?




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi John,

Yes, we just suspended use of the RSID saliva cards due to QC issues and
positive results on the negative control.  It appears there are serious
lot-to-lot issues with the RSID cards.  We have no intention of using them in
the future.  Back to amylase diffusion.

Ken
LASD




--- In forensic-science@yahoogroups.com, "johnatkins63" <johnatkins63@...>
wrote:
>
> Has anyone else observed false positives with water using RSID saliva test?
>

See this link:

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B209568.PDF

Was innocent man wrongly executed?  Will the State of TX admit the  truth?


_http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-tc-nw-texas-execute-0824-082aug25,0,
5812073.story

Sincerely  yours,
Sue
________________________
Sue Sarkis
Sarkis Detective Agency
_
(http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-tc-nw-texas-execute-0824-082aug25,0,5812\
073.story)

(est.  1976)
PI 6564
_www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)
(http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-tc-nw-texas-execute-0824-082aug25,0,5812\
073.story)

1346  Ethel Street
Glendale, CA 91207-1826
818-242-2505


"one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

If  you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
thank a  military veteran


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

We do not use RSID saliva test. We stopped using RSID Semen and RSID Blood test
due to similar issues (false positive and false negative).

--- In forensic-science@yahoogroups.com, "biocrim" <biocrim@...> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> Yes, we just suspended use of the RSID saliva cards due to QC issues and
positive results on the negative control.  It appears there are serious
lot-to-lot issues with the RSID cards.  We have no intention of using them in
the future.  Back to amylase diffusion.
>
> Ken
> LASD
>
>
>
>
> --- In forensic-science@yahoogroups.com, "johnatkins63" <johnatkins63@> wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone else observed false positives with water using RSID saliva test?
> >
>

Here is link to a 3rd Appellate District ruling from August 24th that conflicts
directly with the Rutterschmidt ruling.  The Rutterschmidt ruling was from the
2nd District on August 18th.  It will certainly take more litigation to resolve
Melendez-Diaz with respect to expert testimony.

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/C055923.PDF

Ken

Ken;

They are having to send Dr. Lawrence out to testify because Dr. Bolduc
is a massive fraud, and his testimony continues to draw well earned
fire from the defense (I've worked more than one case where he was the
ME and it's always a problem for the DA; they fight to supress his
background but commonly it fails). As I've stated before on this list,
this is one of the key issues that the supreme court's original
decision was intended to address - to prevent labs and DA's from
giving cover to the incompetent or fraudulent by sending someone else
to testify about exams they didn't perform. Not the only issue, but a
big one.

What's amazing is the ease with which this is admitted. As though its
okay to use a fraud so long as you don't put them on the stand. Like
that's no big deal.

Really speaks to how few board certified ME's there are out there.

Brent
Brent E. Turvey, MS - Forensic Science
Forensic Solutions, LLC
bturvey@...
http://www.forensic-science.com

Author of:
Petherick, W. & Turvey, B. (2009) Forensic Criminology, San Diego:
Elsevier Science
http://www.forensiccrim.blogspot.com

Turvey, B. (2008) Criminal Profiling, 3rd Ed., Boston: Elsevier Science
http://www.corpus-delicti.com/fs_bookstore/cp/cp_index.html

Petherick, W. & Turvey, B. (2008) Forensic Victimology, San Diego:
Elsevier Science
http://www.forensicvictimology.blogspot.com

Chisum, W.J. & Turvey B. (2006) Crime Reconstruction, Boston: Elsevier
Science
http://crimereconstruction.blogspot.com

"... the intermixing of science and politics is a bad combination with
a bad history. We must remember the history, and be certain that what
we present to the world as knowledge is disinterested and honest."
- Crichton, M. (2004) State of Fear, New York: Harper-Collins
Publisher; p.638


On Aug 27, 2009, at 10:38 AM, biocrim wrote:

Here is link to a 3rd Appellate District ruling from August 24th that
conflicts directly with the Rutterschmidt ruling. The Rutterschmidt
ruling was from the 2nd District on August 18th. It will certainly
take more litigation to resolve Melendez-Diaz with respect to expert
testimony.

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/C055923.PDF

Ken

In looking at the two cases, there appears to be some potential middle ground. 
I agree with Brent that there is an issue if a prosecutor is using another
witness to get around a shady character.  But I think, given the past opinions
of the CA supreme court, that they will find some ruling more in line with
People v. Geier.

Adam Dutra


--- In forensic-science@yahoogroups.com, Brent Turvey <bturvey@...> wrote:
>
> Ken;
>
> They are having to send Dr. Lawrence out to testify because Dr. Bolduc
> is a massive fraud, and his testimony continues to draw well earned
> fire from the defense (I've worked more than one case where he was the
> ME and it's always a problem for the DA; they fight to supress his
> background but commonly it fails). As I've stated before on this list,
> this is one of the key issues that the supreme court's original
> decision was intended to address - to prevent labs and DA's from
> giving cover to the incompetent or fraudulent by sending someone else
> to testify about exams they didn't perform. Not the only issue, but a
> big one.
>
> What's amazing is the ease with which this is admitted. As though its
> okay to use a fraud so long as you don't put them on the stand. Like
> that's no big deal.
>
> Really speaks to how few board certified ME's there are out there.
>
> Brent
> Brent E. Turvey, MS - Forensic Science
> Forensic Solutions, LLC
> bturvey@...
> http://www.forensic-science.com
>
> Author of:
> Petherick, W. & Turvey, B. (2009) Forensic Criminology, San Diego:
> Elsevier Science
> http://www.forensiccrim.blogspot.com
>
> Turvey, B. (2008) Criminal Profiling, 3rd Ed., Boston: Elsevier Science
> http://www.corpus-delicti.com/fs_bookstore/cp/cp_index.html
>
> Petherick, W. & Turvey, B. (2008) Forensic Victimology, San Diego:
> Elsevier Science
> http://www.forensicvictimology.blogspot.com
>
> Chisum, W.J. & Turvey B. (2006) Crime Reconstruction, Boston: Elsevier
> Science
> http://crimereconstruction.blogspot.com
>
> "... the intermixing of science and politics is a bad combination with
> a bad history. We must remember the history, and be certain that what
> we present to the world as knowledge is disinterested and honest."
> - Crichton, M. (2004) State of Fear, New York: Harper-Collins
> Publisher; p.638
>
>
> On Aug 27, 2009, at 10:38 AM, biocrim wrote:
>
> Here is link to a 3rd Appellate District ruling from August 24th that
> conflicts directly with the Rutterschmidt ruling. The Rutterschmidt
> ruling was from the 2nd District on August 18th. It will certainly
> take more litigation to resolve Melendez-Diaz with respect to expert
> testimony.
>
> http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/C055923.PDF
>
> Ken
>

UK Forensic "Science" Service will still continue with this fraud of LCN

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8226423.stm


McGlinchey cleared of bomb charge
Declan McGlinchey
No evidence was offered against Mr McGlinchey

The son of murdered INLA leader Dominic McGlinchey has been cleared of four
charges relating to making and possessing a bomb.

Declan McGlinchey, 33, from Gulladuff Road, Bellaghy, was acquitted of the
charges by Mr Justice Gillen, sitting in the High Court in Belfast.

Mr Justice Gillen directed verdicts of not guilty after the prosecution offered
no evidence.

The charges related to the discovery of a bomb in Bellaghy in July 2006.

The prosecution had been relying on DNA evidence found on a piece of tape.

Mr McGlinchy had gone to court on Friday to apply for a variation in his bail
conditions, only to learn of the decision of the Public Prosecution Service
(PPS) not to offer any evidence against him.

Crown lawyer Ciaran Murphy QC explained to the court that the PPS keeps all
cases "under continuing review" as decisions to prosecute are based "on the
available evidence".

"In preparation for trial, consultations took place with the forensic witness.

"As a result of this consultation, and having carefully considered the evidence
as it presently stands, together with the advice of counsel, the PPS has
concluded that the evidence is not sufficient to connect the accused to the
device which is the subject of this indictment," he said.

Mr McGlinchy's solicitor Niall Murphy said his client should never have been
charged as the case was solely-based on Low Copy Number DNA.

He contended that had Mr McGlinchy lived in England "he would never have been
charged" as the authorities there "dictate that prosecutions should not be
undertaken with this type of evidence alone".

Declan McGlinchey's father was once the most wanted man in Ireland.

He was murdered in an INLA feud in 1994.

Declan McGlinchey's mother - Mary - was shot dead in 1987, also as part of an
INLA feud.



ps
What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing.chat.ru/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8226423.stm

McGlinchey cleared of bomb charge
Declan McGlinchey
No evidence was offered against Mr McGlinchey

The son of murdered INLA leader Dominic McGlinchey has been cleared of four
charges relating to making and possessing a bomb.

Declan McGlinchey, 33, from Gulladuff Road, Bellaghy, was acquitted of the
charges by Mr Justice Gillen, sitting in the High Court in Belfast.

Mr Justice Gillen directed verdicts of not guilty after the prosecution offered
no evidence.

The charges related to the discovery of a bomb in Bellaghy in July 2006.

The prosecution had been relying on DNA evidence found on a piece of tape.

Mr McGlinchy had gone to court on Friday to apply for a variation in his bail
conditions, only to learn of the decision of the Public Prosecution Service
(PPS) not to offer any evidence against him.

Crown lawyer Ciaran Murphy QC explained to the court that the PPS keeps all
cases "under continuing review" as decisions to prosecute are based "on the
available evidence".

"In preparation for trial, consultations took place with the forensic witness.

"As a result of this consultation, and having carefully considered the evidence
as it presently stands, together with the advice of counsel, the PPS has
concluded that the evidence is not sufficient to connect the accused to the
device which is the subject of this indictment," he said.

Mr McGlinchy's solicitor Niall Murphy said his client should never have been
charged as the case was solely-based on Low Copy Number DNA.

He contended that had Mr McGlinchy lived in England "he would never have been
charged" as the authorities there "dictate that prosecutions should not be
undertaken with this type of evidence alone".

Declan McGlinchey's father was once the most wanted man in Ireland.

He was murdered in an INLA feud in 1994.

Declan McGlinchey's mother - Mary - was shot dead in 1987, also as part of an
INLA feud.



ps
What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing.chat.ru/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine.

Is anyone familiar with a court case that admits entomological (blow flies)
evidence as a valid, creditable, form of science under either Fry or Daughbert ?

A good book for such information would be "Fly For The Prosecution" by M.
Lee Goff whereby he speaks of quite a few actual court cases.



Sincerely  yours,
Sue
________________________
Sue Sarkis
Sarkis Detective Agency

(est.  1976)
PI 6564
_www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

1346 Ethel  Street
Glendale, CA 91207-1826
818-242-2505


"one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

If  you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
thank a  military veteran


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Perhaps this will bring all this pseudoscience claptrap to a halt

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/2009/08/31/dna-on-trial-in-peter\
-hoe-murder-appeal-84229-24571596/


DNA on trial in Peter Hoe murder appeal

Aug 31 2009 by Gareth Lightfoot, Evening Gazette

THE Peter Hoe murder appeal will hear from a former FBI chief scientist and
could have international ramifications, the Gazette can reveal.

DNA evidence is to be put to the test when brothers David and Terry Reed appeal
against their convictions for the murder of Teesside strongman Peter Hoe next
month.

Their solicitor James Watson told the Gazette today: "The outcome in the Reeds
appeal is likely to be of critical importance, not just in English law but to
legal systems throughout the world.

"It's bringing together a range of worldwide experts who fundamentally disagree
with the science that has been used in England.

"The ramifications of Reed are potentially worldwide at the moment.

"The outcome of the legal and scientific argument will be persuasive throughout
the developed world."

It is thought that the case will take centre stage in an international dialogue
about the use of DNA evidence.

The debate revolves around the `Low Copy Number' (LCN) DNA testing technique - a
method allowing forensic scientists to produce DNA profiles from smaller samples
containing very few cells.

The Reed appeal, before Court of Appeal judges in London, will start on October
20.

David Reed, 31, and Terry Reed, 27, of Tennyson Avenue, Grangetown, always
denied the murder of Peter Hoe.

They were convicted in 2007 and are serving life sentences with a minimum of 18
years each before they can apply for parole.

Dad-of-six Mr Hoe, 43, bled to death from stab wounds in his living room in
Jubilee Road, Eston. His body was found on October 13, 2006.

The Reed brothers' lawyers are to argue that their convictions were unsafe.

They will raise concerns that the use of LCN DNA may be unreliable and could
risk producing "freak" or inaccurate results due to the small size of the
samples.


They are expecting to call Professor Bruce Budowle, previously the FBI's premier
biological scientist.

The geneticist, who worked for the bureau for 20 years and helped pioneer DNA
fingerprinting of crime suspects in the 1990s, is to fly over to the Reed appeal
from his current workplace at the University of North Texas.

Mr Watson added: "Everyone regards him as being a pre-eminent world expert on
the issue of LCN DNA.

"We're bringing world-renowned experts into the Court of Appeal to argue that
LCN DNA is unreliable and sooner or later is going to convict an innocent man.
There are just so many imponderables with this DNA.

"For the first time we've got LCN DNA finally up as an issue in a court that's
binding.

"There have been at least a dozen convictions in England using LCN DNA. They're
all trying to appeal.

"Because the Reed case is the first one, the Court of Appeal in England is going
to give guidance.

"The Reed case has been a catalyst to bring together world concerns about the
reliability of LCN DNA testing.

"All the American cases are watching this and are fascinated at Budowle coming
here.

"There are all sorts of cases around the world waiting for a definite judgment
from a court. Our Court of Appeal has put itself at the head of the world issue
on this point."

Mr Watson, from Middlesbrough law firm Watson Woodhouse, representing the Reeds,
previously said their verdicts were "the most troubling conviction in the 25
years I've been a solicitor". He said there were "grave doubts" about the safety
of the convictions.

The LCN DNA method was questioned in the Omagh bombing case, in which a man
charged with killing 29 people in the 1998 Northern Ireland bombing was
acquitted.

The judge in that case rejected LCN's use, saying it was not yet seen to be at a
sufficiently scientific level to be considered evidence.

He said the chance was too great that material from innocent people could be
mixed with that of the culprit.

The Reeds' legal team may also call two more experts.

Mr Watson said no US state had allowed the LCN DNA science to be used as
evidence in court.

A California court rejected an attempt to introduce LCN DNA evidence earlier
this year with the judge ruling the analysis results as inadmissible.


ps
What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing.chat.ru/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine.