|
|
Post by Hope on Mar 12, 2022 3:39:30 GMT
This is the report that led to the incorrect claim of Marilyn's DNA being identified at the crime scene. Well female DNA which apparently equalled Marilyn. Her DNA was NOT found at the crime. The report states the female DNA in question was determined to be contamination from the previous female analyst. There are some other interesting things about this report. First there's this:  So, the female DNA is most likely the prior Analysts but what about the male DNA identified? That's not important? There are labs that can work with that mixed sample and get results. Also, it's important to remember & is stated in the report, they have DNA profiles Marty, Bo (familial), Marilyn & Dee. They also have DNA on Johnny, Dana, and Sue. None of those people were a possible match . If they were, the report would have stated they could not be eliminated as a contributor to the mixture, as it said for the female Criminalist. Justin's DNA had not be obtained at the time of this report, if the male DNA was later determined to be his, we would have heard about it. That DNA belongs to someone else. |
|
|
|
Post by Hope on Mar 12, 2022 3:48:32 GMT
The other interesting thing with this report is a section has been removed from the bottom of pages 4 & 5. What information was there that needed to be removed before posting it? The names of other random/innocent people were left there for all to see. The therapist's named was whited out. If the removed section simply contained a name it would have been treated in the same manner. Nothing was mentioned when these reports were posted. They were summarized as we see them, the missing sections were not acknowledged. Item 27A mentioned in these reports is the piece of tape found in the floor. The piece later ID'd as a match for Justin. The match had not yet been made, it was DNA of an unidentified male at this point.    |
|
|
|
Post by Hope on Mar 12, 2022 3:49:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by joemcplumber on Mar 12, 2022 20:54:32 GMT
While it's my opinion that he absolutely should not be and never should have been, David was working with the cops. They probably gave him, at minimum, broad parameters of what he should or should not post to the public. Because of stuff the criminals shouldn't know. I know, it's way too convenient but this is probably what he'd say about any given redaction.
IMO with all the documents going back and forth between a law enforcement investigation and a private, unaffiliated, and non-professional citizen, the entirety of this library belongs to private, unaffiliated, and non-professional citizens. The public. Not some random glory whore who watermarks them all to claim personal ownership. Is this case not "inactive" again? Has the sheriff's office not tossed in the towel and decided no prosecutions will come of it? Then it doesn't matter anymore does it and the public has every right to this stuff as Dave does.
Surely some law governs this sort of thing? Or some lawyer can clarify.
If any individual private citizen has a claim to these files it's Sheila. Wouldn't THAT be delicious.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hope on Mar 12, 2022 21:44:15 GMT
I have wondered the same thing. Invasion of privacy, interference with law enforcement investigations & procedures, future court proceedings, fair trials, etc has all gone out the window. The information is no longer privileged and all confidentiality was breeched the second Gamberg handed the entire caseload over to Dmac (even before that, but undeniable now). Dmac = private citizen = information now belongs to public domain, not just one person. And that would be delicious!
|
|
camfaults
Full Member
Historian, researcher, writer; major focus on cold cases of California
Posts: 151
|
Post by camfaults on Mar 12, 2022 22:24:58 GMT
The missing segments of documents are bothersome. Who made that editing call? What is missing? This case is doomed.
|
|
|
|
Post by snoho17 on Mar 12, 2022 23:02:42 GMT
Exactly Joe! What's interesting to me are the documents that weren't leaked. Against D's claims, he was not given carte blanche over all the evidence, only certain pieces.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hope on Mar 12, 2022 23:53:28 GMT
Yes, and this one was only released because he thought it pointed guilt at Marilyn.
There are a couple of possibilities for what was written there. But I don't want to speculate or spread misinformation, so I'll just leave it at information that would bring question to the prevailing theory.
I forgot to include this in the OP, but it appears the unidentified male DNA on the cords is from a different person. Not the same profile found on the tape that was also still unidentified when this report was written. If it was the same profile they would have realized this and the report would have included so by saying the unidentified male contributor previously identified on item 27A (tape) cannot be eliminated as the contributor for the male DNA located within this mixture identified on item 85A (brown cord).
|
|
|
|
Post by kmik on Mar 14, 2022 3:32:42 GMT
It's obvious that this DNA Evidence report was cropped because pages 1,2,3 and 6 show the full page with page number at the bottom. Pages 4,5 look to be only half a page and show no page number at the bottom like pages 1,2,3 and 6. Either dmac cropped it because he doesn't want us to see what it said or LE cropped it because they don't want dmac to see what it said.
|
|
