Madeleine McCann: Does the new DNA test bring new hope of a solution?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7959431.stm

23/03/09

"New DNA test gives cold case hope

Forensic scientists say they are excited about the new technique

A new technique which can decipher previously unintelligible DNA samples has been made available to all police forces in England and Wales.

The Forensic Science Service (FSS) said the DNAboost method might shed light on "many thousands" of unsolved cases.

It allows scientists to obtain individual DNA profiles from crime scenes which contain a mix of genetic material from several people.

But some experts have warned that it could lead to miscarriages of justice.

During the pilot, DNAboost was used on about 2,000 samples in four police forces - Humberside, Northumbria, South Yorkshire, West Yorkshire.

The FSS said it helped police to identify suspects and build evidence for cases, and was now "fit for purpose" to be used by all forces."

Now "fit for purpose? Well, if the FSS has managed to hang onto the samples from the vehicle the McCanns rented over three weeks after their daughter disappeared, perhaps the scientists could not revisit those samples and using this new technique, separate the DNA of individuals in the mix they said contained the DNA of at least three people.

From an article posted on Enfants Kidnappés, August 5th, 2008:

My Big Desk Archives August 2008

"That confirmation arrives with the first report of analyses which states that 15 out of 19 DNA markers belong to Madeleine. That's all the police need. The evidence is there. Obvious. The first report of the analyses proves the parents' guilt in the eyes of the investigators. This report would be considered as irrefutable proof by, I believe, all the police. From then on the parents were placed, logically, under the specific status of, "arguidos." Of course, an error rate of 1 in a billion is not a 100% profile, in that Clarence Mitchell is right. Then, afterwards, comes a thunderbolt.* A second report from FSS arrives and totally contradicts the first. Also ruining the evidence the police thought they had. According to this report, the harvested samples would have been contaminated, making them very unreliable in the end. Several DNAs would have been mixed, creating the DNA of anyone!"

Come on FSS, dig out those samples and use this technique, which you are claiming is reliable enough to be used by police forces, now being, as I repeat, "fit for purpose."

If you read the post from Enfants Kidnappés, you will see that there were two conflicting reports from FSS: the first report appeared to state that Madeleine McCann's DNA had definitely been identified in the samples from the hired car; the second report stated that the samples were contaminated with the DNA of several people, thus making the results unreliable. Perhaps this new technique can now be used to render the results more reliable and thus add weight to the alerts given by the "Advanced Human Remains Recovery Dog," Eddie, who signalled the presence of cadaverine, the odour given off by a human corpse, in the McCanns' hired car.

I do recall reading that the samples could not be sent to another lab for testing, though, because they had been lost or destroyed by the FSS. This is the same organisation which mislaid samples which kept an innocent man in prison for ten years longer than he needed to be there. So, I don't hold out much hope here. Perhaps the police should go in there with a search warrant if FSS can't locate those samples. Send in the cops! That lab in Birmingham is hardly fit for purpose if it keeps losing samples in important criminal cases.

Enfants Kidnappés 24/09/08: Eddie and Keela - what the Madeleine McCann case file says.

Inspection of the apartments.

Date: July 31st 2007 - 8pm. Report:

Participants:

PJ: Tavares A. & Ricardo P. Inspectors
UK: Mark Harrison, Martin Grime (UK Forensic Canine P SM Expert),
Eddie & Keela (English Springers)
Silvia B. Manager of the Ocean Club complex.

On that date, inspections were conducted in the apartments occupied by members of the McCann family as well as the group who were with them at the time of Madeleine McCann's disappearance. It was only on that date that the apartment, identified as that of the parents, was empty allowing further investigation which was authorised by the respective occupants. Thus, at the appointed time, the search with the dogs began, covering the following apartments:

5A:

From 8.30pm to 9.20pm, the dogs go through.
8.20pm: The cadaver dog, "marks," the couple's wardrobe area in the bedroom.
8.22pm: The cadaver dog, "marks" an area behind the sofa in the sitting room near the window overlooking the road.
From 8.47pm to 9.20pm, the blood detecting dog goes through.
8.10 (should it be 9.10?) The dog, "marks" an area of floor behind the sofa in the sitting room, near the window overlooking the road.

5B: 9.24 to 9.27pm: The cadaver dog did not alert on anything.

5D: 9.29 to 9.34pm: The cadaver dog did not alert on anything.

5H : 9.35 to 9.38pm : The cadaver dog did not alert on anything.

4G : 9.42 to 9.45pm : The cadaver dog did not alert on anything.

Garden belonging to apartment 5A (with access via the balcony and the steps):

9.49 to 10pm: The cadaver dog "marks" an area of the garden immediately below the window.

Date: 01 août 2007 - 06h00

Inspection of the surrounding areas.

Date: August 1st - 6am

After evaluation of the area surrounding the Ocean Club tourist village, based in Praia da Luz, taking account of the characteristic topography of the ground and the distance from where the small child Madeleine McCann disappeared, an inspection was carried out with the help of dogs specialised in the detection of cadaver odour, in various places, such as described:

1 - At 6.40am, an area between the "Piteira" road and the "Oliveira" road, was inspected. At 7.15am the inspection was completed with nothing being detected by the dogs.

2 - At 7.25am, an area adjacent to the "BEIJAFLOR" property on the "Figueira," road, defined by the "Ramalhete" road. An inspection of the whole area was made and nothing abnormal was noted. The inspection was completed at 7.45am.

3 - At 7.55am, an area between the "Casa Azul" residence on the "Figueira" road and the "Casa Pandora" residence as well as a dirt road on the left of the "Figueira" road was inspected by the dogs without anything abnormal being noted. The inspection ended at 8.05am.

4 - At 8.20am, an area between the residences "Casa Pandora" on the "Figueira" road, "Quinta Mimosa" and "Casa Ladeira" without anything abnormal being noted. The inspection ended at 8.40am.

A photographic report of the places inspected is attached.

Initial conclusion.

To the coordinator of the criminal investigation.

Faced with new elements revealed by the dog handling unit's search, attached to the report, and on the basis of Mark Harrison's report, there is every reason to believe that the small child Madeleine McCann died in apartment 5A where she was spending her holiday with her parents at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz. Following the markings by the cadaver odour detecting dogs and traces of human blood inside the apartment from which the child disappeared, we have done further extensive research, revealing that there was never a death, or a body, notified in this same apartment before. In this report, several places were marked, signaling the presence of cadaver odour and human blood. In addition, we can observe that a cadaver odour was detected in the garden adjacent to apartment 5A. Nothing was detected in the other residences.

It follows from this investigation that there are indications, in practice and in the facts, of the crime of murder such as defined in ArticleQI310 of the Penal Code.

So as to go further with this lead, of which certain results may reveal new evidence, we request authorisation to carry out further inspections, within the legal framework, in two distinct places:

1 - Rue des Fleurs no...The McCann family's current residence in Portugal.
2 - Rented vehicle Renault Scenic, registration ...DA - 27.

We suggest that this inspection is entrusted to the PJ and ask the Public Prosecutor for a 20 day mandate. Thus, we consider that there are indications that consolidate strong suspicions according to which, there are elements of evidence of a crime, inside the vehicle used by the McCanns and, moreover, likely to reveal important details of fundamental importance for the investigation.

Villa rue des Fleurs.

Report:

August 2nd 2007 -6.14pm - 27 Rue das Floras- Praia Da Luz - Lagos

Participants:

PJ: Ricardo P & J. Carlos P., inspectors.
UK: Mark Harrison, Martin Grime & Eddie.

On that date, within the context of a residential search, carried out at the McCann couple's current residence, an inspection by a dog handling team was made. Thus, at the time indicated at the beginning of the report, all areas of the property were inspected and the following results obtained:

6.36pm - The dog Eddie, who detects cadaver odours, "marked" the area of a cupboard in the living room. On checking, the dog was indicating a pink soft toy belonging to MadeleineMcCann.

The clothes.

Date: August 2nd 2007 - 11.20pm

On that date, following the home visit made to the McCanns' current residence, on the Rue des Fleurs, various items of clothing were laid out in an appropriate place for this purpose, to carry out an inspection by the dog handling unit.

The collected items of clothing were set out individually with the agreement and under the directions provided by the British technicians, the dogs having previously covered the space where the clothing was laid out.

1 - 11.20pm: Prior reconnaissance of the place by the two canine units to guarantee that the space was clear of all odours being sought. The reconnaissance was completed at 11.30pm without anything being signaled by the dogs.

2 - 11.30pm: An initial inspection by the human blood detecting dog, began with the clothing packed in the box bearing the notation: "Living room." At 11.40pm, the inspection was completed without the dog showing anything abnormal.

11.41: The canine human remains recovery dog started its inspection and "marked" various clothes. The inspection was completed at 11.52pm. The clothes were returned to their box for later use.

From 12.02am until 1.30am, (03/08/07) all the other boxes, containing clothing from the twins' bedroom, from the friends' bedroom, from the bedroom of the couple labeled 1 & 2, as well as the empty luggage, was inspected by the two dogs without conclusive results.

Apartment 5A - OCEAN CLUB

As joinder to the procedure. It is made known and according to superior orders that today at 8pm, specialists from LPC (Police forensics lab) Fernando V. and Lino R., after having seen the recorded images resulting from the inspection by the dog handling unit on 31/07/07 in apartment 5A, duly mandated, proceeded with the collection of whole floor tiles where the dogs used in the inspection indicated the possible existence of traces of human blood as well as the presence of a body in the apartment. The tiles were lifted so as to preserve possible samples to be analysed by the appropriate laboratory. This entire action was filmed in order to illustrate the way in which the lifting was accomplished and with what tools so that the experts had a better idea of the work.

Robert Murat/Casa Liliana

Report:

August 4th and 5th 2007.

Casa Liliana, residence of the suspect Robert Murat, situated on "Ramalhete" road - Praia da Luz - Lagos.

Participants:

PJ: Tavares A., chief inspector, J. Carlos P., Ricardo P, inspectors
UK: Mark Harrison, Martin Grime and Eddie.

On that date, within the context of residential visits, which were carried out at the home of the suspect ROBERT MURAT, an inspection by the dog handling unit was made in the gardens and inside the residence of the accused.

August 4th 2007 - 7.28pm: Start of the inspection of the gardens of the residence. Eddie, human remains recovery dog, covered the whole perimeter outside the dwelling and nothing abnormal was signaled.

August 5th 2007 - 3.22pm: The same dog inspected all rooms of the residence and nothing in particular was signaled.

RUSSELL O'BRIEN

To the coordinator of the criminal investigation.

In the context of the investigation, we have collected information concerning a vehicle used by RUSSELL O'BRIEN, friend and member of the group who spent their holiday with the McCann family in the Algarve . At the time of the request for vehicles considered important to the procedures that follow, we were not aware of the identification details of this vehicle. Meantime, our investigation has led us to establish that it may be a vehicle of the "Opel" range, a "Corsa" model, registration....AG - 62. At the present time, we do not have a mandate to search for and seize the vehicle to allow us to add the vehicle to the planned inspections. As a consequence, we request such a legal mandate in order to be able to realize the planned inspections.

Samples sent to the lab.

Between 3pm on August 4th 2007 and 6.30am on August 5th 2007, the following samples were recovered in the living room of apartment 5A at the OCEAN CLUB where a murder probably took place.

Samples 1A to 3B: recovered on the floor.
Samples 4A to 13B: recovered on the wall.
Samples 14A to 15B: recovered behind the sofa.
Sample 16A: recovered from the blue curtain.
Samples 16B: recovered from the white curtain behind the blue curtain.

All of these elements have been handed over to the Birmingham Forensic Science Services. (FSS)

Samples recovered in the car.

Between August 6th at 9.30pm and August 7th at 4am, the following samples were recovered in the grey Renault Scenic car.

From the driver's side:

1A: Hair
1B: Fibre and hairs
1C: Fibres and hairs
1D: Fingernail

Front passenger side:

2A: Hair
2B: Hair
2C: Fibres and hairs
2D: Fibres and hairs
2E: Fingernail

Between the seats:

3A: Hair

Back seat:

4A: Hair
4B: Fibres and hairs
4C: Fibres and hairs

Centre seat:

5A: Hair
5B: Fibres and hairs
5C: Fibres and hairs

Right-hand seat:

6A: Hair
6B: Fibres and hairs
6C: Fibres and hairs

Luggage compartment (rear boot)

7A: Hair
7B: Fibres and hairs
7C: Fibres

8A: Hair
8B: Fibres and hairs
8C: Fibres and hairs

9, 10 and 11: Hair

12: Car key

13: Control samples of seat fabric

All of these were handed over to Birmingham FSS for analyses.

http://www.kidnapping.be/maddie/maddie.html

Enfants Kidnappés 5/08/08: the McCann parents are less and less credible?

http://www.kidnapping.be/maddie/maddie.html

DNA results

05 août 2008


The parents are less and less credible?

Since the case file has been accessible to the press, all the media are commenting on it. All the Portuguese newspapers are disclosing worrying details, placing in doubt the assertions of the parents. In fact, many details remain difficult to explain. Many details, facts and witness statements, contradict the assertions and statements of the parents and their friends. Of course, the details revealed in the press are not going to be favourable to the McCann family. And for the reason that the investigators built up an opinion of them and that opinion flows through the pages. Be careful, however, not to put words into my mouth: I am not claiming that the PJ directed the investigation according to their beliefs. Quite the opposite! The investigation was conducted as it should be. It is the contradictions, the gross inconsistencies, the lack of cooperation, the parents' inappropriate reactions, which naturally led the investigators to suspect the parents. You know all the worrying details we are talking about:

• Kate going back to her friends, shouting: "They have taken Madeleine," but leaving her children in the apartment where an abduction has just been committed.

• The friends who set about looking for her, but who do not go and look in their own apartments to see if she is there or their children are still there.
  
• The bedroom perfectly tidy and Madeleine's bed undisturbed. (Thanks to the kidnapper for having remade the bed or else Madeleine was not in her bed at the time she disappeared.)
• The fact that British diplomats were advised and that they put pressure on the police investigation. (Kate admitted in a British newspaper, a few days ago, having telephoned the British Prime Minister to ask him to put pressure on the investigation so that, "progress is made."
  
• The contradictory statements about the forced door (which wasn't), the dilapidated and forced shutters. (which were not that either).
  
• The witnesses who didn't see the same things as the parents and their friends while being in the same places at the same time. (299 witnesses were questioned).
  
• The inconsistencies in the statements by the group of friends.
  
• The lack of cooperation from the group.
• The refusal to participate in a reconstruction (Yet crucial in finding out what happened to Madeleine - isn't that the only objective?)
  
• The blood found in the bedroom.
  
• The cadaver odour detected.
• Etc

If these are accurate, it can be understood that the investigators had begun to have serious suspicions. There are many others and sometimes more striking than the few simple examples which I list. The press will present you with others throughout the coming days. The most serious of the published discussions and articles will be about, on the one hand the sniffer dogs of which I give you a brief reminder:


The action of the British dogs, specially trained to detect the odour of corpses and human blood was decisive in Gerry and Kate's being suspected. Given the coincidences faced with the action of the two dogs, who indicated the same places as well as the same objects, the authorities were obliged to admit the possible involvement of the parents in their daughter's disappearance and to designate them, "arguidos," in order to confront them with elements which could lead them to an indictment. The inspectors explain that the dogs gave signs of detecting the odours of human corpse and blood in the places and on the objects that follow:

In the apartment from which Madeleine disappeared (In the bedroom and in the lounge)
In the kichen garden.
In the vehicle rented by the parents 24 days after Maddie's disappearance.
On two items of Kate's clothing.
On Maddie's soft toy which Kate did not put down in the days following the disappearance.

In the apartment of friends of the McCanns, in the village of Praia da Luz and in vehicles used by Robert Murat - the first accused of being suspicious - nothing was detected by the dogs.

On the other hand, articles will focus on the DNA analyses...

The DNA results.

The media war has begun. The British newspapers do not speak the same language as the Portuguese newspapers. Thus, Clarence Mitchell, the parents' spokesperson, states in the British press: "The DNA results were never 100% compatible with Madeleine's DNA. A note of caution had been expressed at the outset. The police were wrong to pursue this line of investigation. The Portuguese judicial system has admitted having no evidence! I can confirm that the PJ stated to Gerry that Madeleine's DNA had been found in the two apartments and in the vehicle, while it is now clear that that is not what the first report from FSS said. You must ask yourself what the police were trying to do in inventing evidence which they don't have and which they cannot have. In these circumstances, it could be asked what is their motivation."

We are going to flatten Mr Mitchell's statements somewhat. From the point of view of a police officer, it happens that the police tell suspects that they hold evidence, which they don't in reality have, in order to crack a suspect; this should not be done any old way. Indeed, it is difficult to tell a suspect, for example, that his fingerprints were found at a crime scene while the suspect knows that he appropriately wore goves throughout his offence and that as a result the police are talking rubbish! You must be quite serious. Putting forward evidence which you don't have must remain plausible, knowing that if the suspect is indeed the guilty party, the police will lose face if they invent evidence that the suspect knows to be false!!

On the other hand, Clarence Mitchell's interpretation of the DNA results invite circumspection. To help us with our thinking, our association called upon an expert on the subject. She is Madame S. Adamis, Legal Expert at the Centre for Human Genetics at the Catholic University of Louvain. (GNEX - UCL)

Association Enfants Kidnappés: Do you know about the LCN technique and is it commonly used?

S.Adamis: LCN (Low Copy Number) is a technique developed by the laboratories of the English Forensic Science Services to analyse samples containing a very small number of molecules of DNA. The basic principle is to increase the number of PCR cycles to increase sensitivity. [Gill, 2000; Whitaker, 2001] This technique has two major drawbacks:

1) It produces unbalanced profiles for one or more markers, with possible disappearance of an allele due to the stochastic* effect.

(*Involving chance or probability)

2) It leads to the detection of one or more alleles in negative controls of unknown origin.

The first drawback leads to obtaining an incomplete profile, partially wrong and not reproducible. This low reliability goes against principles of quality advocated notably by standard ISO 17025 in force in our country.
The second requires necessarily working in special conditions to avoid contamination inherent in the environment and particularly from human DNA present in the dust in the atmosphere or on the surfaces of objects. Given the limitations of this technique, the conclusions produced could easily be attacked or invalidated during a trial. This technique is not routinely used in laboratories for genetic identification in Belgium.

AEK: If in a DNA analysis, 15 out of 19 markers belong to person, "x", can we conclude that it is indeed from that person?
S.A.: If the profile is complete and of quality, and the analysed markers are informative, then without doubt! The result is discriminating. This result is very very reliable. The error is in the region of 1 in a billion! It is almost impossible for it to be otherwise. For a convincing DNA profile, there must be a minimum of 7 base markers. In the case which you present, 15 markers out of 19 does not leave any hanging doubt. This result is completely reliable and usable in court. The error rate of one in a billion is so unlikely that the results are accepted by magistrates without lawyers being able to place them in doubt.

We are going to digress here. We understand even better the attitude of the PJ. Indeed, faced with the inconsistencies we are talking about above, the police officers have doubts. Then the dogs detect traces of blood and cadaver odour. The doubts transform into beliefs. But something is missing. All these elements are not sufficient to face charges in a court. Confirmation is lacking. Scientific confirmation. That confirmation arrives with the first report of analyses which states that 15 out of 19 DNA markers belong to Madeleine. That's all the police need. The evidence is there. Obvious. The first report of the analyses proves the parents' guilt in the eyes of the investigators. This report would be considered as irrefutable proof by, I believe, all the police. From then on the parents were placed, logically, under the specific status of, "arguidos." Of course, an error rate of 1 in a billion is not a 100% profile, in that Clarence Mitchell is right. Then, afterwards, comes a thunderbolt.* A second report from FSS arrives and totally contradicts the first. Also ruining the evidence the police thought they had. According to this report, the harvested samples would have been contaminated, making them very unreliable in the end. Several DNAs would have been mixed, creating the DNA of anyone!

* I took liberties there with the interpretation because that was the best phrase that came to me in the context!


EAK: If we harvest the DNA of three different people, can we recreate the DNA of anyone?

S.A.: If the harvested DNA is mixed with the DNA of three individuals in a balanced way, then effectively we could find the DNA profile of anyone. Mine just like yours. But the mixture must be perfectly balanced, otherwise the rate of reliability becomes very low, going from 1 in a billion to 1 in a thousand or 1 in a 100. It is no longer a question of considering this result as discriminating.

Ok, what happened? LCN unreliable? The samples contaminated during the second analysis but not in the first? The first analysis botched by FSS? There would be a good way of finding out. When two experts contradict each other, a third analysis is carried out in an independent lab. But, alas, following an incident that remains unexplained, the only existing DNA samples were, unforunately, lost or destroyed by the laboratory, which renders impossible a third analysis!