Release Of Forensic Dna Results For Sierra Kills Sample

[Hairy Man]

Yes, if you look at the actual report (not just my release statement) you will see the proportions they estimated.

I do plan to release a timeline/synopsis of my work with the lab - you will see a bit of a roller coaster. Much of the roller coaster resulted from the fact that during the FIRST round of testing, they essentially threw the whole sample in a blender and then tested to see what came out. On the second round, however, they did a single strand hair test - this greatly diminished any contamination. That gave a clear picture of what we had. It also corroborated at least one of the hair morphology conclusions.

Tyler Huggins

Thank you Tyler. That is a excellent lab report - it clearly states the sample is female black bear contaminated by human DNA. What I find very, very interesting is the section under the mDNA. The human mDNA contaminating the sample and Justin's mDNA are of a halotype that originated in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus...exactly where Dr. Ketchum stated that her "bigfoot" DNA originated. Hummmmm.....

[Guest mitchw]

The report clearly states that the sample is 10% black bear when using black bear primer, only.

[Guest]

So Justin is of Eastern European descent.......

[Guest]

Have you ever had the priviledge of going through Justin's hunting pics? There is no way my man misidentified them. He is extremely versed in hunting. He may have attempted a hoax(not saying that is what I think) but the possibility of him shooting bears, thinking they are BF, is highly unlikely.

I didn't say he mis-identified a bear for a bigfoot, I said he shot a bear and then told a story, imo. Some hunters don't take the whole carcass out with them (especially if they are poaching) , they just cut out the meat they want and leave the rest. I remember Justin saying they had back packs to haul out the meat.

[Guest Theagenes]

Yeah, I think "Smeja" is a Hungarian surname.

[Guest crabshack]

So Justin is of Eastern European descent.......

nope thats the bear, lol

[Guest BartloJays]

Slim-

Justin said what he did because he's always had more confidence in the sample being from what he thought it was (not certain though...big difference). He believed the sample was viable for the "adult" subject he shot and couldn't take the constant back and forth rollercoaster of information we were getting from the lab so we shielded him from it (at his request). This is stuff you guys don't have an opportunity to know about until we get emails up for you to see the process unfold.

It was highly stressful for him and I can tell you that when they got mtDNA bear primer hits (before they picked up human) I had driven up to Sac and grabbed Justin to head out for the weekend near Tahoe. I confronted him in the car to gauge his reaction and his reaction was one of being extremely puzzled, not angry protest or defensive gestures. I remember him saying like "something isn't right" to that effect and sure enough we get back and the rollercoaster begins when they detect human mtDNA.

As close as 6 weeks or so ago we were alive (no final determinations made) in that we were receiving some lax communication that needed more clarity. Don't take my word for it though, when we provide all the communications please take that ride with us. You

would understand some of the frustrations we had to deal with.

[Guest slimwitless]

Thank you Tyler. That is a excellent lab report - it clearly states the sample is female black bear contaminated by human DNA. What I find very, very interesting is the section under the mDNA. The human mDNA contaminating the sample and Justin's mDNA are of a halotype that originated in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus...exactly where Dr. Ketchum stated that her "bigfoot" DNA originated. Hummmmm.....

Have a cigar. You just gave birth to the a new meme.

[Guest Tyler H]

What I'm saying is there are regulations for shipping a biological sample into Canada, there are regulations covering the collection of bear parts in the state of California.

As far as I can tell none of which were observed making the testing of this sample, in violation of US federal Law, and Canadian Law. It is irrelevant what the results actually are in regards to Bigfoot. From what I'm seeing is a bunch of guys violated any number of laws, and are bragging about it on the internet, so in fairness I'm asking for the surrounding providence proving this ISN'T SO.

Ok, that's exactly where I had kinda assumed you WOULDN'T bother going.

Are you law enforcement? If so, this is the wrong forum for you. Pursue your investigation through other means.

If you are not law enforcement, then why do you care? None of this has anything to do with the results. We aren't here for a law lecture - we are here to discuss the results of the testing. Guess what - I ran a red light last week.

Guess what else - Trent University is allowed to import genetic material. Can you imagine that? A forensic lab with international contracts that is actually allowed to import genetic material. I'm not going to answer anymore questions that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. Questions about procedures, the science, Justin, motives, etc are all welcomed, but this one is just out of left field.

Tyler, was the first round of testing with the same Canadian Lab? Also, I'm not seeing any mention that they were cleansing the samples prior to extraction, unless that is covered in their mentioned protocols. If there was an effort to remove contamination, is there an explanation why it didn't work?

yes, the Trent University performed two rounds of testing for me. I will admit that I was disappointed that they did not do more to isolate the sample in their first round of testing. It would have reduced the time, the cost, and the roller coaster ride. But the second round of testing (from the same set of samples I had from Justin) did clean and isolate contaminating factors.

Good questions, also Tyler H stated, they threw the whole sample in a blender and then tested to see what came out. Why would they do that?

What if it was a chunk of a squatch and had bear saliva all over it?

Yes, the choice of primers used, do have an effect on the result. I'm going to venture outside of my expertise here, and try to convey my understanding in layman's terms - hopefully I get it right. If you use a lizard primer on a bear sample, you won't get a match. Your primer won't amplify the DNA properly. But if you use a very broad primer, like a generic "mammal" primer, then you will get "hits" for all mammals present in the sample. In this case, they only ever got ONE bear and ONE human hit. There was no third mammal present. The human was Justin, and the bear was bear. It became very tough to argue with them once the human hit matched Justin. I developed a set of protocols out of all this effort. One suggestion in the protocols is to test the "chain of custody" earlier in the undertaking - one more way to save time effort and money, if anyone ever goes through something similar.

...

Whence the number 10%, Tyler?

The way I understood it was that based on the mass of tissue they had, they could expect up to a certain amount of DNA to be present. That optimal amount was not present, presumably due to degradation. Instead, they had 15% of that maximum amount as human DNA, and 10% of that potential amount as bear DNA. But this was all and estimate based on one way of doing the calculations. When they went after the nDNA, and when they did the second, single strand hair test, it became evident that those estimates were off.

The data does not refute the following potential scenario: The bear tissue could have been degraded and not had a lot of viable DNA left in it. Then Justin comes along and contaminates the sample with a dose of very healthy DNA - not yet degraded, because it is fresher. As such, a lot of his DNA amplifies, and only a small amount of bear DNA amplifies. That would give the initial impression that there was more human present than bear. But again, once they sought to isolate the contamination, it became very clear that the hair/tissue was bear. Again, this was supported by a second independent lab, and got preliminary support from the third PhD geneticist I engaged. (Who, by the way is quite convinced of the existence of Sasquatch.)

Bart and Tyler, were you guys keeping Justin apprised of your findings? He gave this interview on November 29, 2012, almost two weeks after your DNA report is dated. Among other things, Justin says he believes the odds are the flesh was from the animal he shot...same color, same smell, same area. He does admit it is circumstantial though. He indicates that DNA testing was ongoing but as of yet, there were no "negative" results but a lot of hits on human. And "as of now" it was premature to say whether it was from the creature he shot.

Didn't anyone tell him about your back and forth with the lab?

The rollercoaster ride became very hard on Justin. At some point we all decided it was best for him to not be updated too regularly until we had final word. Yes, we did keep him in the dark for long stretches - with his permission. I believe I broke it to him the day after that interview. I rarely knew when he was giving interviews.

Edited December 27, 2012 by Tyler H

[Guest mitchw]

Tyler, will we get to see the second lab's work?

Edited December 27, 2012 by mitchw

[Guest slimwitless]

As close as 6 weeks or so ago we were alive (no final determinations made) in that we were receiving some lax communication that needed more clarity. Don't take my word for it though, when we provide all the communications please take that ride with us. You

would understand some of the frustrations we had to deal with.

Thanks, Bart.

Boots please.

[Ike]

How bout this scenario...Smeja et al. having submitted genuine BF samples to Dr. Ketchum and her study, for whatever reasons becomes disenchanted/disillusioned by said study, and in an effort to torpedo her study, deliberately submits bear samples to another lab, knowing it will show up as bear thus discrediting MK? Not saying this is the case, but could be plausible.

Edited December 27, 2012 by Ike

[Guest VioletX]

Tyler, not sure if you answered this, but how did Justin's DNA come to get on the sample? Did he think it was when he sliced some off for this study or earlier?

[southernyahoo]

Yeah, I think "Smeja" is a Hungarian surname.

Though the surname wouldn't necessarily be an indicator for mtDNA.

[Guest Theagenes]

Though the surname wouldn't necessarily be an indicator for mtDNA.

Oh yeah, good point. It's his mother's lineage that matters.