VIDEO - McCann Investigation: Every Picture Tells a Story....

If Murat genuinely had his life ruined by all the salacious articles about him in the press, then he probably deserved the pay out he received, but something about him still doesn't sit right with me and I haven't ruled out his involvement. Did he keep a dignified silence about all the false accusations, or is there more to the reason he didn't scream from the rooftops that he'd been fitted up? I think we'll never know the truth.

Eli wrote:

- " The Haplotype identified by the letter S, present in 2 samples, (apartment in Burgau), and identical to that of Jane Michelle Tanner (JT), meaning those samples were from that person or individuals of the same maternal bloodline. “
unquote

Sorry, I took the above to mean that it simply means that JT would be either the owner of the hair, or it would be of a cousin or sibling.

Do you mean to say that it must definitely be JT's hair?
I'm not particularly well up in DNA but Gerry (in the Swedish interview - Fredericson I believe) seems to have even less idea. Rather worrying.
He says in so many words that of course there is DNA of Maddie in the car because both their DNA was there. Perhaps a cardiac consultant doesn't need to know much about that sort of thing?

there is DNA of Maddie in the car because both their DNA was there.

On this basis why wasn't there any DNA of Maddie in the apartment? Why did gerry have to go back to the UK to get some? There would have been plenty all over Ocean club, tennis courts etc

dazedandconfused wrote:If Murat genuinely had his life ruined by all the salacious articles about him in the press, then he probably deserved the pay out he received, but something about him still doesn't sit right with me and I haven't ruled out his involvement. Did he keep a dignified silence about all the false accusations, or is there more to the reason he didn't scream from the rooftops that he'd been fitted up? I think we'll never know the truth.

I think Murat was roped into helping them with the cover up, but for some reason the T9 were trying to stitch him up as the abductor. They made this clear from day 1. I think Murat is a seedy character but not someone remotely involved with child abductions and crimes of this nature. The T9 obviously felt confident he would not fight them for some reason, maybe they knew how scared he was about his reputation if his dirty little secrets came out into the public domain

tigger wrote:Eli wrote:

- " The Haplotype identified by the letter S, present in 2 samples, (apartment in Burgau), and identical to that of Jane Michelle Tanner (JT), meaning those samples were from that person or individuals of the same maternal bloodline. “
unquote

Sorry, I took the above to mean that it simply means that JT would be either the owner of the hair, or it would be of a cousin or sibling.

Do you mean to say that it must definitely be JT's hair?
I'm not particularly well up in DNA but Gerry (in the Swedish interview - Fredericson I believe) seems to have even less idea. Rather worrying.
He says in so many words that of course there is DNA of Maddie in the car because both their DNA was there. Perhaps a cardiac consultant doesn't need to know much about that sort of thing?

Hi tigger, let me give you an example of what I mean; ~ If you found a hair on your shoulder and took a hair from your head and examined them microscopically and they matched, then you could safely say they are identical & that both hairs belonged to you as it’s extremely rare for two people to have identical hair characteristics. If you then took the hairs and did an mtDNA test all it would tell you is that they may have come from you or someone maternally related ( from the same bloodline).

So I would presume, by stating they are identical means that the morphology of the hair sample found is identical to the reference sample and the mtDNA shows that the hair sample found could have come from the same person or individuals of the same maternal bloodline.

hope that helps.... & yes if they say identical then imo that means it's a match.

It’s understandable why there was a need for the analysis to check the National DNA Database and this no doubt would have been procedural as is recording any findings in the report however this analysis was also done to compare trace evidence found in a location ~ i.e. samples of hair found in locations against known reference samples.