Oh yes the fallacy odf dna
>
> In the mark lundy trial prosecution was 6 weeks of evidence defence was 3
> days .
> The enormous amount of blood in the room particularly the daughters
> where there was a blood shadow across the curtain where the offender
> stood.There were also bloody footprints .Yet the witness claimed to
> see him fleeing the scene in a shirt and tie which when inspected was
> not contaminated.nor his footwear nor anything of his.Later a minute
> speck of dna was found on a polo shirt originally said to be in the
> trunk of his car.But it was retreived from the exhibit room by an
> unsupervised officer.Esr in nz australia and uk refused to acknowledge
> the existance as brain tissue but the crown found a texan dr. that
> experimented on a chicken and confirmed it.No one else in the world
> has presented this evidence.
>
> In the jules mikus trial who appealed was only refused last week the
> dna evidence was claimed by the crown to be 60 million times more
> likely to be him.Yet this is equivalent to only a 7-8 loci dna
> match.His father in jail for rape would be the exact same.Parent
> siblings match approx 13 loci dna.He claims his dna profile does not
> match the suspect profile but was refused further dna testing at his
> appeal.By comparison nicholas reekies dna was stated as 700 billion
> approx 10-11 loci match. NZ testing has a 15 loci maximum reading
>
I can't confirm all the detail of this, nor to claim to be more than an amateur in understanding dna profiling, but I do recall that the police had to search high and low for a scientist to make the confirmations in the Lundy case. I also recall there was a problem with dna profiling or forensic findings in the Barlow case, and no doubt the whole country remembers Jules Mikus snr was a serial sexual offender.
Justice is a one way street when you consider the unlimited funding
ReplyDeleteavailable to the crown for examination of evidence. Compare the costs
associated in the texan doctors evidence in the lundy case yet the
defence were refused costs to prove the "pinging" of cell towers to
prove the location of the phone.
As in the bain trial the police claim they went to telecom for phone
records of laniets cellphone and were told that they were not
available, but were later told that they would cost $3000 to access
but was never done.
Justice it seems is always favourable to the crown and if a report
from a crown paid entity such as ESR produces a non favourable report
they simply...
pay for another