Author Topic: New Forum & News Updates  (Read 850187 times)

Offline Chaucer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 523
  • Thanked: 80 times
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7980 on: April 15, 2021, 12:35:04 PM »
What games? I’m just saying it’s now possible to extract DNA from rootless hairs. Wasn’t meant as an attack on you at all.
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2716
  • Thanked: 400 times
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7981 on: April 15, 2021, 01:19:36 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What games? I’m just saying it’s now possible to extract DNA from rootless hairs. Wasn’t meant as an attack on you at all.

READ THE DOCUMENT! NO OTHER DNA EXAMINATIONS WERE CONDUCTED!

Good luck with your suspect.

Got any bangles and bows for sale ?

 

Offline Chaucer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 523
  • Thanked: 80 times
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7982 on: April 15, 2021, 01:46:18 PM »
1. I know. I never said any other tests were done. I offered it as a suggestion. Apparently I was wrong. I’m not arguing with you here about that.

2. I just wanted to point out that DNA can be extracted from hair now. Given there is a small hair mentioned in the 302s, I thought that was interesting.

3. I don’t have a suspect.

4. What size bangles and bows do you need? Large are $20 and small is $10.
 
The following users thanked this post: Parrotheadvol

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2716
  • Thanked: 400 times
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7983 on: April 16, 2021, 04:06:55 PM »
I have discussed FBI File 21625 April 2002 with several former colleagues, who helped design kits genetic used by the FBI Lab, and there are some interesting 'tentative' results.

First. the 302 reports 9 loci results only, because the AppliedBioSystems Profiler Plus* kit used, only tests for nine loci. This kit tests for 7 loci within the old CODIS-13 system, and Amel on the X and Y chromosome (determines sex), but this kit in particular also tests for two haplotype-racial markers HumvWA and HumFGA which strictly speaking are not part of the CODIS-13 system - and these two markers in particular are not even part of the modern CODIS-20/22 system.

Keep in mind we do not have any strength values for any of the 9 loci returned.  FBI File 21625 is only a general report and does not report that technical information. But, the fact of 9 loci returned is NOT due to some failure of the test to return a full CODIS-13 profile resulting in a socalled 'partial', but is only due to the nature of the kit used in this test. The KIT only tests for nine loci! Strictly speaking, the kit chosen is not a standard CODIS-13 kit !

Apparently, there was some discussion about the choice of the kit used in connection with Q40 and Q41. Because this kit tests for  HumvWA and HumFGA which are not even part of any CODIS system. These loci are associate with somebody trying to determine the racial or ethnic/haplotype group to which a suspect belongs. These two loci are among the list of loci one would test to determine which global group a person belongs: eg Filipino, Eskimo, Nordic, Arabic, etc. Again we have no strength results reported for any of the 9 loci mentioned File 21625.

It appears the FBI Lab chose at least one test that would shed light on somebody's racial-ethic group ? With this, I am wondering if there are other tests the FBI has run that are not reported to date ? I dont see that this one test reported is conclusive about anything ?  ;) This test almost requires that other testing needs to be done! Its an interesting story that has yet to be told...  and explained. The choice of that specific Applied Bio Systems Profiler Plus (*) kit is only the beginning of some story. 
« Last Edit: April 16, 2021, 04:30:27 PM by georger »
 
The following users thanked this post: Bruce A. Smith, andrade1812, Chaucer

Offline Bruce A. Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4069
  • Thanked: 334 times
    • The Mountain News
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7984 on: April 16, 2021, 04:33:03 PM »
Sounds like you have tapped into a very important story that needs more coverage. Thank you immensely for this reportage. I trust you have the energy to keep going, G.
 
The following users thanked this post: georger

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2716
  • Thanked: 400 times
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7985 on: April 16, 2021, 05:41:54 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Sounds like you have tapped into a very important story that needs more coverage. Thank you immensely for this reportage. I trust you have the energy to keep going, G.

It appears the FBI Lab was looking for anything that would indicate the part of the world Cooper matched with - which means somebody gave the matter some serious thought. They chose a kit that would combine several basic C-13 loci with two 'haplo' specific loci. That's a smart move.  I think that choice was intentional and no accident. I hope I am right about this.   :)     

One of the things we did today was review the list of kits the FBI was using in 2002. The AmpPlus kit was right at the top of the list (preferred). That is the kit the 302 says was used. That is no accident but a choice. 

Here were most of their choices:

Following are the most frequently used PCR kits for the Original CODIS Core Loci and CODIS Core Loci accepted at NDIS (listed by manufacturer):
•   Applied Biosystems (AB) AmpFlSTR®Profiler Plus® (Part Number 4303326) ........ the kit used in the reported test.
•   AB AmpFlSTR®COfiler® (Part Number 4305246)
•   AB AmpFlSTR®Profiler Plus® and AmpFlSTR®COfiler® (Part Number 4305979)
•   AB AmpFlSTR®Profiler Plus®ID (Part Number 4330284)
•   AB AmpFlSTR®Profiler Plus®ID and AmpFlSTR®COfiler® (Part Number 4330621)
•   AB AmpFlSTR®Identifiler® (Part Number 4322288)
•   AB AmpFlSTR®Identifiler® Direct (Part Number 4408580)
•   AB AmpFlSTR®Identifiler® Plus (Part Number 4427368)
•   Promega PowerPlex®1.1 (Catalog numbers DC 6091/6090)
•   Promega PowerPlex®1.2 (Catalog numbers DC 6101/6100)
•   Promega PowerPlex®2.1 (Catalog numbers DC 6471/6470)
•   Promega PowerPlex®16 (Catalog numbers DC 6531/6530)
•   Promega PowerPlex®16 BIO (Catalog numbers DC 6541/6540)
•   Promega PowerPlex®16 HS (Catalog numbers DC 2100/2101)
•   Promega PowerPlex®18 D (Catalog numbers DC 1802/1808)
•   Promega PowerPlex® Fusion (Catalog numbers DC 2402/2408)
•   Promega PowerPlex® Fusion 6C (Catalog numbers DC 2705/2720/2780)
•   AB AmpFlSTR® MiniFiler™ (Part Number 4373872)
•   AB AmpFlSTR® Yfiler® (Part Number 4373872)
•   AB AmpFlSTR® Yfiler Plus® (Catalog Numbers 4484678 and 4482730)
•   Promega Powerplex® Y (Catalog numbers 6760/6761)
•   Promega Powerplex® Y23 (Catalog numbers DC2305/DC2320)
•   AB GlobalFiler™Express (Part Numbers 4474665 & 4476609)
•   AB GlobalFiler™ (Part Number 4476135)
•   QIAGEN Investigator 24plex QS (Catalog numbers 382415/382417)
•   QIAGEN Investigator 24plex GO! (Catalog numbers 382426/382428)
•   Thermo Fisher Scientific VeriFiler Express™ (Catalog Numbers A32014, A32070, A33032)
•   Verogen ForenSeq™ DNA Signature Prep Kit (TG-450-1001/TG-450-1002) (see NDIS Procedures for additional information)
•   Promega PowerSeq™ CRM Nested System (Catalog # AX5810) (see NDIS Procedures for additional information)
•   Thermo Fisher Scientific Applied Biosystems™ Precision ID mtDNA Whole Genome Panel (Catalog Number A30938)  mtDNA control region data is approved for NDIS
« Last Edit: April 16, 2021, 06:02:22 PM by georger »
 
The following users thanked this post: Chaucer

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2716
  • Thanked: 400 times
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7986 on: April 17, 2021, 12:01:18 AM »
Who was the source of the rumor (or fact) that the FBI has a "partial" profile for DB Cooper, which 'cannot rule people in, but can rule people out' ?

Who is the source of the claim the reason the FBI only has a PARTIAL is because the dna samples were DEGRADED. Who made that claim? Bruce Smith?

Who made these claims? Was it Ckret, Bruce Smith, Smokin-99, Hangdiver, Skip Porteus, Galen Cook, Robert Blevins, Geof Gray, Tom Kaye .... ?  Was there a specific post or article by somebody which started this 'notion' people now rely on as fact?

On May 27 2008 Ckret posted: "I don't know how the lab got the DNA from the tie. The tie was sent to them with a request to attempt to locate any DNA material. The lab processed the tie and returned their results. My guess is that they swabbed any obvious stains and/or areas that would have come into contact with skin."

On Dec 18 2007 Ckret posted: "In reference to the tie, we only know Cooper was described as wearing a black tie with a clasp and a black tie with a clasp was found in the seat Cooper had been sitting in. In regards to the DNA, if it is Coopers tie (more likely his than not) then at least one of the donors would most likely be Cooper.Having said that and given the facts surrounding the tie and DNA, DNA in this case could not 100% rule anyone out or in as being DB Cooper. Even if a subject matched as being one of the donors, that would not absolutely make him DB Cooper. "

What FBI 302 or credible person in the Cooper community *certifies* that the FBI has a PARTIAL NUCLEAR DNA PROFILE for Cooper (or someone on the plane) that can only be used to rule people out, and has been used to rule several named suspects out, one of them Sheridan Peterson, I guess ?

Can anyone clarify these issues? [/b]   Shutter?

* Who first reported on Epithelial cells? A post by Blevins attributes this to Porteous ?
« Last Edit: April 17, 2021, 12:50:54 AM by georger »
 

Offline Chaucer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 523
  • Thanked: 80 times
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7987 on: April 17, 2021, 01:17:07 AM »
This is a good question, and one I have only taken as fact without question.

Clarification?
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2716
  • Thanked: 400 times
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7988 on: April 17, 2021, 01:42:03 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This is a good question, and one I have only taken as fact without question.

Clarification?

I thot I used to know, thot it was probably Ckret, then I checked Ckret's posts and found nothing ... maybe it was Bruce Smith ? Maybe it was Smith via Cook or Porteous ? Yes, we all take this as gospel today but where and who is responsible for this "myth" ?  Maybe it was some FBI agent Cook or Smith interviewed? Some agent that wrote a book? ................ Im at a total loss.

The Profiler Plus kit used in 2002 only tests for 7 Codis-13 loci. That's a PARTIAL right there! A literal partial. Has nothing to do with degradation results!

Could it be that is what people have been referring to all these years without it having anything to do with degradation or actual results from the Profiler Plus test? Or were there other tests and results we dont know about? Keep in mind not even Ckret knew the actual results of the 2002 test unless there was some report he read but decided not to pass on to the public!

I want to know who started the partial rumor in the Vortex based on degradation or whatever (actual results) ?
« Last Edit: April 17, 2021, 01:59:05 AM by georger »
 

Offline Robert99

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1219
  • Thanked: 132 times
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7989 on: April 17, 2021, 01:51:05 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This is a good question, and one I have only taken as fact without question.

Clarification?

I thot I used to know, thot it was probably Ckret, then I checked Ckret's posts and found nothing ... maybe it was Bruce Smith ? Maybe it was Smith via Cook or Porteous ? Yes, we all take this as gospel today but where and who is responsible for this "myth" ?  Maybe it was some FBI agent Cook or Smith interviewed? Some agent that wrote a book? ................ Im at a total loss.

The Profiler Plus kit used in 2002 only tests for 7 Codis-13 loci. That's a PARTIAL right there! A literal partial. Has nothing to do with results!

Could it be that is what people have been referring to all these years without it having anything to do with degradation or actual results from the Profiler Plus test? Or were there other tests and results we dont know about? Keep in mind not even Ckret knew the actual results of the 2002 test unless there was some report he read but decided not to pass on to the public!

I want to know who started the partial rumor based on what ?

I think some poster attributed that remark to Ckret even though Ckret may not have posted it himself.
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2716
  • Thanked: 400 times
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7990 on: April 17, 2021, 01:53:00 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This is a good question, and one I have only taken as fact without question.

Clarification?

I thot I used to know, thot it was probably Ckret, then I checked Ckret's posts and found nothing ... maybe it was Bruce Smith ? Maybe it was Smith via Cook or Porteous ? Yes, we all take this as gospel today but where and who is responsible for this "myth" ?  Maybe it was some FBI agent Cook or Smith interviewed? Some agent that wrote a book? ................ Im at a total loss.

The Profiler Plus kit used in 2002 only tests for 7 Codis-13 loci. That's a PARTIAL right there! A literal partial. Has nothing to do with results!

Could it be that is what people have been referring to all these years without it having anything to do with degradation or actual results from the Profiler Plus test? Or were there other tests and results we dont know about? Keep in mind not even Ckret knew the actual results of the 2002 test unless there was some report he read but decided not to pass on to the public!

I want to know who started the partial rumor based on what ?

I think some poster attributed that remark to Ckret even though Ckret may not have posted it himself.

I tend to believe you are right and it may have been Smith interpreting Ckret, in an interview article? I know for a fact Galen Cook pushed the degradation angle to me in emails years ago ... I think Cook said he got it from Ng.

Maybe Bruce will comment later .......................  ;)
« Last Edit: April 17, 2021, 01:57:01 AM by georger »
 

Offline Bruce A. Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4069
  • Thanked: 334 times
    • The Mountain News
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7991 on: April 17, 2021, 03:51:58 AM »
In my book I've written "partial DNA" that can only exclude suspects, as I got it from Larry Carr, aka "Ckret," in a phone interview in 2008.

Further, Larry said the DNA sample came from epithelial cells recovered from the clasp. Only much later did I ever hear anything about three samples from three males, etc.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2021, 03:53:38 AM by Bruce A. Smith »
 

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1964
  • Thanked: 292 times
    • ERIC ULIS: From the History Channel
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7992 on: April 17, 2021, 12:11:07 PM »
It's in the FBI files...page 21966.
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2716
  • Thanked: 400 times
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7993 on: April 17, 2021, 03:13:17 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
In my book I've written "partial DNA" that can only exclude suspects, as I got it from Larry Carr, aka "Ckret," in a phone interview in 2008.

Further, Larry said the DNA sample came from epithelial cells recovered from the clasp. Only much later did I ever hear anything about three samples from three males, etc.

Yes, this is all coming back now ... FJ has just located the source of DEGRADED. It comes from a memo from the Deputy Director circa 2006: D.B. Cooper Part 52 of 52-284 DBC 21966. Thanks to FJ. The memo says more - draw your own conclusions as some here will.

Losely titled "The DNA Project" ... 302s surrounding  DBC 21966 mention suspect dna being submitted for comparison ... was the project terminated for lack of good evidence to work with? Obviously there was some discussion about the quality of evidence available which can only happen after kit results are available. Somewhere in all of this Cook or someone else authoritatively said: 'and multiple tests were run'! And something like: 'the degraded status was determined after multiple tests had been run and still no usable results' ?  The one kit identified is solid as to what it does and does not do. Were multiple tests run, with other kits? Who knows?

 :rofl:

« Last Edit: April 17, 2021, 03:27:46 PM by georger »
 

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2716
  • Thanked: 400 times
Re: New Forum & News Updates
« Reply #7994 on: April 17, 2021, 04:08:01 PM »
If anyone is left in this discussion and cares - here is what actual return data looks like, in graphic form, for the ProfilerPlus kit identified in the FBI 302. Data usually occurs in two forms: graphic vs numeric. This is where the rubber meets the road! Arguments about what the data is saying or not saying occur here! The usefulness of any Cooper dna data would have been determined here, after one or multiple tests.

So, if you are going to mount an argument about your suspect being DB Cooper or not, based on some dna evaluation, you had better be prepared to submit data like this, because anything else will be empty propaganda!  *this comes from the ProfilerPlus Manual.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2021, 04:08:54 PM by georger »