Release Of Forensic Dna Results For Sierra Kills Sample

[southernyahoo]

It would seem that since Next Generation sequencing is only 5-6K and sequences multiple whole genomes at once on everything present it would be a logical option.

[Guest Tyler H]

Anyone know how we can get a list of "nextgen-capable" forensic labs in the US?

[Guest]

Tyler I can get you that list, but if it's the boots you're referring to, From what I've learned, blood is harder to get Nuclear than other samples, especially with the likely contamination on the boots, and the surly degraded state of it. That being said, it's absolutely worth a try. If you're not referring to the blood, sorry for butting in.

DR

Edited January 14, 2013 by Derekfoot

[southernyahoo]

Here's one for an example, I'd be interested to hear what they have to say on the cost. You might also look into the various ways it can sequence a genome, De novo vs mapping for instance.

http://www.beckmangenomics.com/sample_submission/next_generation_sequencing.html

[Guest]

Tyler,

here is a list of " illumina core labs "

1. Texas University South Western

2. Cleveland Clinic / Learner Research Institute.

3. Duke University.

4. John Hopkins University

5. Mayo Clinic College of medicine.

6. Oregon Health Services University.

7. Pennington Bio medical Research Center

8. Stanford University.

9. UCSD University.

10. University of Colorado / at Denver

11. Yale University.

It is important to note though that some of these places won't do species ID.

Hope that helps.

DR

[Guest]

Out of curiosity, what will the labs be asked to test for? This seems to me to be a challenge in itself.

[Guest Tyler H]

Thanks much Derek - yes, that jives with what I have come to learn as well.

Do you happen to know which of those would qualify as forensic labs? I can suss that out - just thought you may have that handy.

Personally, I think it would be great to use labs that can replicate the methodologies and/or technologies used by Melba, while not actually being the same lab(s). Hopefully any important information pertaining to that will be available to these labs.

Corvus - The labs will be asked to identify the species associated with any DNA in the boots. We may be in for a bit of a list.

[Guest]

Here's a question for anybody following the whole matter -- If the testing of J's boots is conducted in a manner concordant with Melba's methodologies, and the results show no indication of BF, how will that affect your level of belief in the shooting story and Melba's study?

On the one hand, I can see how this would be the final straw in causing some to disavow any support for either.

On the other, I can see how the prospect of contamination will cause some to disregard the boot test results.

I guess my worry is that regardless of the expense incurred, there will be some that refuse to accept the results, no matter which way they point. i.e. - if the boots confirm Melba's findings and Justin's accounts, there will always be somebody saying that the interpretation is subjective and shady, or if the boot results are contrary, there will always be somebody saying, "ah well, it's contaminated ..."

Maybe the science is of a degree of detail that would preclude such gerrymandering ...

[Guest]

Tyler,

I'll try to find out for you this eve.

[TimB]

Cheech- you are asking what effect a hypothetical result from the boots would have on my belief in the hypothetical results of the Ketchum report is?

Tim B.

[Guest]

Tyler,

I didn't have any luck with the forensic question. Might just have to call them.

[Guest Tyler H]

Here's a question for anybody following the whole matter -- If the testing of J's boots is conducted in a manner concordant with Melba's methodologies, and the results show no indication of BF, how will that affect your level of belief in the shooting story and Melba's study?

On the one hand, I can see how this would be the final straw in causing some to disavow any support for either.

On the other, I can see how the prospect of contamination will cause some to disregard the boot test results.

I guess my worry is that regardless of the expense incurred, there will be some that refuse to accept the results, no matter which way they point. i.e. - if the boots confirm Melba's findings and Justin's accounts, there will always be somebody saying that the interpretation is subjective and shady, or if the boot results are contrary, there will always be somebody saying, "ah well, it's contaminated ..."

Maybe the science is of a degree of detail that would preclude such gerrymandering ...

I think if the boots turn up nothing unusual or unknown, it is going to be just too easy to say "well, they were likely very degraded, so not unexpected." And honestly, that could be my own attitude as well. But I disagree with thinking that if they turn up something novel, that people will also discount that. I think the science will stand on its own, if an indication of a novel DNA is discovered.

Tyler,

I didn't have any luck with the forensic question. Might just have to call them.

Appreciated Derek - will do.

Edited January 15, 2013 by Tyler H

[Guest BartloJays]

Here's a question for anybody following the whole matter -- If the testing of J's boots is conducted in a manner concordant with Melba's methodologies, and the results show no indication of BF, how will that affect your level of belief in the shooting story and Melba's study?

On the one hand, I can see how this would be the final straw in causing some to disavow any support for either.

On the other, I can see how the prospect of contamination will cause some to disregard the boot test results.

I guess my worry is that regardless of the expense incurred, there will be some that refuse to accept the results, no matter which way they point. i.e. - if the boots confirm Melba's findings and Justin's accounts, there will always be somebody saying that the interpretation is subjective and shady, or if the boot results are contrary, there will always be somebody saying, "ah well, it's contaminated ..."

Maybe the science is of a degree of detail that would preclude such gerrymandering ...

I think this is a fair question and I'm happy to answer it from my point of view considering Justin and I have become close friends throughout everything that's happened from behind the scenes in the last 15 months or so. Although what I do and or whom I associate with are my decisions and business, I think it's a good question.

Digressing a bit and looking at the available evidence logically, both the circumstantial tissue and non-circumstantial boots, I've truthfully never had high hopes for the evidence provided.

I personally now or ever (now especially of course from our lab confirmations, unless Dr. Ketchum successfully circumvented those results through her own) believed through the circumstances provided from day one, that the tissue recovered was ever likely from the purported adult subject shot on 10/8/10 (by reasons I explained earlier), therefore have never counted on it. If it had turned out to be, great, throw a party. Again, that's based on the circumstances including time (5 weeks), state of recognition when retrieved, immediate location found vs where subject was last heard crashing off etc....point being, the tissue actually makes more sense to me "not" being from the subject shot, than if it was, all facts, claims and details considered. That's my opinion accounting for everything and even the harshest skeptic, to be technically accurate, should concede that our results are not "contradictory" in nature with respect to the claim, they are technically "non-substantiating" results. Had the initial claim been that tissue was taken from the deceased subject at the time of the shooting coupled with our results, that's an entirely different ballgame and would make our results contradictory in nature therefore confirming a hoax.

That's a big distinction, and as I've said, from the outsider looking in who's not interested or up to date with the details and looking at consistent claims from the witness from day one, they see a story that they'd anticipate being like all others before and after it (with shootings and or bodies and nothing substantial "yet" materializing to back it), a piece of tissue submitted by one of the witnesses and it comes back bear..should be end of story. I don't believe that's the case here, if specific details do matter, nor do I believe this Sierras saga is over by any means. "Potentially," only phase one is.

The boots on the other hand, are non-circumstantial in nature, though expectations should be tempered because realistically we're dealing with multiple contaminants from both before and after purported shootings,including environmental contamination, oxygen exposure (which I just learned is not good not being an expert myself), submerged in water with a relatively high level of saltinity (when Justin & Jack's boat brokedown sturgeon fishing and he swam in them) etc... However, all is not lost as there may've been enough prior blood saturation from shooting event with respect to the leather material to yield blood evidence. I can't stress enough how diligent we're being to do everything we can to recover whatever is there and we're about ready to finally make our move on them.

Having said all that coupled with the multiple reasons I have believing them from a personal perspective vetting both guys (above and beyond), what I've seen in my relationship with them, what I've heard, what I filmed (astronomical coincidence in and of itself if this shooting never happened) only a Dan Marino hail mary pass from where the purported shooting event happened, what I know etc.. I feel extremely confident the incident happened as described. Not certain, as again I could be wrong, I wasn't there, but confidant enough that what will change my mind and potentially my future relationship with Justin is any of these three scenarios because in these confirmed scenarios I will not associate with somebody who planned, or participated in a hoax of some kind:

a ) a confession

B ) catching him in major deception related or unrelated (that goes with any friend) to the incident

c ) boots yield "predominant" presence (not expected minute contaminant presences) of a contributor other than what was claimed.

Before our relationship developed as friends, I accepted the fact and knew there was a good chance that the condition of the evidence provided may not substantiate him. Our friendship wasn't conditional on him being vindicated (though I hope to see it because I think he/they are telling the truth) it came to be because of his cooperation and ethical decisions behind the scenes, his perseverance to prove his experience and himself, our parallel interests (fishing and now especially for him, bigfoot research) and circumstances (young families). Since I've known him, he's batting a 1000 with me (absent validated physical evidence, I just understandably can't guarantee the shooting happened as claimed) and he knows better than anybody I will never compromise my principals and would publicly reveal deception with this shooting if it exists, immediately, rather it be tomorrow or ten years from now.

What I've seen firsthand is he seems to make a decent impression on those who actually have met him in person, including initial naysayers and he certainly doesn't shy away from questions face to face. Matter of fact, I know dozens of people who've met him in person and based off that time spent are more inclined to believe him and I know no on that's met him that is less inclined to believe him.

At the end of the day, we now have a very active seasonal site that we'll be hammering the next few summers together and with a few others.... trying to gather any evidence, additional visual documentation, forensic or otherwise we can from it. That I guarantee.

Edited January 15, 2013 by BartloJays

[Guest]

Here's a question for anybody following the whole matter -- If the testing of J's boots is conducted in a manner concordant with Melba's methodologies, and the results show no indication of BF, how will that affect your level of belief in the shooting story and Melba's study?

Cheech, and others, how would you know if you were following Ketchums methodologies? I do not think she has released any of that information?

A year and a half ago, it looked like she was doing SNP, now it looks like she is doing whole genome sequencing?

There is no way to replicate her methodologies just by guessing!

On the other hand, the use of STR - the same methodology of Id used by FBI and others in their databases - essentially looking for the number of matches at 15 know variable sites, and doing the math to determine chance of 15 matches all the same, that is completely valid in this case. I am not sure if a complete genome is any better than STR in this particular instance. You may have so much data - 3 billion base pairs, that it may be difficult to process, analyze and sort it all out!

The analogy I use is: so I hand you a 5 dollar bill, you can look at it, and you know what it is. You can examine it closely, and know it is not counterfit. But if you chose to look at it under a 1000 power microscope, you would have to examine a whole lot of very high resolution "pictures", and be able to place them accurately, to be able to figure out it was a 5 dollar bill. Hell I could give you 1000 photos taken through my scope, and you could not identify even that it was US currency, let alone what denomination. It would take alot more pictures and alot more patience, and alot more flawless effort to even get to the point of IDing it as money, let alone a 5 dollar bill!

The analogy is not perfect, but hopefully you see my point. Getting alot more A&T&G&C's is not neccisdarily more powerfull or more telling, sometimes it creates alot of obtusification!

[Guest]

DNA testing has revealed that burgers in the British Isle contain horse meat:

Horse Meat Discovered In Burgers Sold In UK And Ireland

Four major supermarket chains operating in Britain are withdrawing a number of beef products after horse DNA was found in frozen burgers sold in the UK and Ireland by Aldi, Iceland, Lidl and Tesco.

The Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI), which made the discovery, said the burgers were produced by two processing plants in Ireland, Liffey Meats and Silvercrest Foods, and Dalepak Hambleton in the UK.

In nine of the 10 burger samples from the four retailers, and from the Irish chain Dunnes Stores, horse DNA was found at very low levels. However, in one sample, from Tesco, the level of positive DNA indicated horsemeat accounted for 29% relative to the beef content.

— http://www.businessinsider.com/horse-meat-discovered-in-burgers-sold-in-uk-and-ireland-2013-1

Thus, it appears that it is routine to be able to resolve mixtures of tissues from different species.