Current Claremont Murders Discussion & Edwards trial updates

[JWS2019]

"The defence accepts that the mixed DNA profile extracted from the sample that became AJM40 and AJM42 is consistent with a two person profile, the contributors of which are Ms Glennon and the accused," he said". It matches, even the defense said that. The difference is they say it was from contamination. It doesnt sound like they will argue that its not a DNA match.
42 was tested in NZ apparently in 2003/04 specifically for the Y chromosome. This makes me think that 42 didnt have any other DNA on it but CG's. NZ was using LCN by then, but they may have not used LCN on that nail...we will wait and see.
The alleged BRE DNA may well have been in the material from 40 only that apparently was never subjected to DNA testing until 2008.
It could also be that both fingernails had a small amount of DNA on them, that when combined created enough that the LCN was able to detect it.
I agree that the next few months will be interesting as we hear from the DNA experts from both sides

I don’t think Yovich has 100% said what his avenue is as yet. At the moment he’s just saying I am not disputing what your result is, and his statement is ambiguous IMO (Which I know is an unpopular view of mine!)

I don’t even think he will provide a definite point of contamination or error just potential doubt as a whole to Hall, like:
- treatment of mixed DNA
- quality of samples and strength
- other DNA of path west members being found and how they got there, if they working on the job and if not, how easy is it for contamination to occur
- similar cases of contamination and if from same job, and if not why?
- collection processes
- Dr Webb - generally speaking
- Profile percentages and accuracy
- record keeping (especially computerised and their history)

On the Telstra and Holden fibres I think alone they are still a little general in conviction (to major corporations and suppliers)
Good to see Hall is asking his own questions so I don’t think this will be an issue on being thorough in interpretation I.e. about the magnifying machine-which may be an avenue? If used on the same day to compare?

I value your interpretation and opinions! And yes will be interesting to see the defences interpretation.

 

[one eyed spy]

This is exactly how it works

It's actually not exactly how it works as its automatically checked for you when you apply for a national police clearance these days & any convictions that can be spent, will be, before the document is issued.
They can also be granted by the judge at sentencing in Magistrates Court but I still havent seen anything to say BRE was given one.

 

[one eyed spy]

If the field work and the post-mortem were so sloppy, how have we not heard of any of the other people present contributing their DNA?
Transfer in the field or at the post-mortem would have had to be tertiary transfer: Person 1 leaves DNA on object A. Person 2 touches object A. Person 2 transfers DNA from object A to object B. So BRE leaves his DNA on KK shirt. Detective examines KK shirt without gloves and doesnt wash his hands. Detective passes DNA from KK shirt to CG nail which must have occurred the same day.
Strange how no KK DNA was left also?
IF contamination occurred, it only really could have happened in the lab.
I also dont understand what you mean by "very good chance all of the samples may have been contaminated"...What are all of the samples?
AJM 46 and 48 were tested in the UK and they were not contaminated.

Have you been provided with a list of all the exclusionary DNA profiles? Has every sample been tested recently and all the results provided? No & no. I stand by my comments because its my opinion, I dont have to be proved right or wrong & of course thats the kind of transfer I mean.

 

[kingswood71]

I stand by my comments because its my opinion, I dont have to be proved right or wrong.

Ditto and ditto

 

[JezzaPerth]

Have you been provided with a list of all the exclusionary DNA profiles? Has every sample been tested recently and all the results provided? No & no. I stand by my comments because its my opinion, I dont have to be proved right or wrong.

The defence has not asserted there is any other 'drop in' DNA in the AJM 40/42 sample. If there was it would certainly have been announced in the opening statement.

So your straw-man argument about exclusionary DNA profiles is totally irrelevant.

Fact is: There is no KK, Webb, Ashley, McCulloch, Cooke, Margolius, nor any other police and lab worker DNA in the AJM 40/42 sample. The sample has been handled correctly even by the norms of modern LCN analysis.

 

[JWS2019]

The defence has not asserted there is any other 'drop in' DNA in the AJM 40/42 sample. If there was it would certainly have been announced in the opening statement.

So your straw-man argument about exclusionary DNA profiles is totally irrelevant.

Fact is: There is no KK, Webb, Ashley, McCulloch, Cooke, Margolius, nor any other police and lab worker DNA in the AJM 40/42 sample. The sample has been handled correctly even by the norms of modern LCN analysis.

Jezz hasn’t Yovich not commented too much until his independent reports come back?

edit:

being they weren’t back at time of opening statements?

 

[kingswood71]

The defence has not asserted there is any other 'drop in' DNA in the AJM 40/42 sample. If there was it would certainly have been announced in the opening statement.

So your straw-man argument about exclusionary DNA profiles is totally irrelevant.

Fact is: There is no KK, Webb, Ashley, McCulloch, Cooke, Margolius, nor any other police and lab worker DNA in the AJM 40/42 sample. The sample has been handled correctly even by the norms of modern LCN analysis.

And dont forget that the a sample of the LCN DNA was then tested again in NZ after the UK and this concurred with the UK results.

 

[kingswood71]

Jezz hasn’t Yovich not commented too much until his independent reports come back?

I thought he said that in regards fibres?

 

[one eyed spy]

Strange how no KK DNA was left also?
IF contamination occurred, it only really could have happened in the lab.
I also dont understand what you mean by "very good chance all of the samples may have been contaminated"...What are all of the samples?
AJM 46 and 48 were tested in the UK and they were not contaminated.

For the fact that you dont consider any chance of contamination at any time considering the knowledge they had and the practices many have already admitted to, there's no point continuing the conversation IMO. For all we know, something else was tested in the lab from a totally unrelated crime back in the day for no result which may have been the contaminant. They didn't use new tweezers for starters. If you think you're being presented with all the results & being given all the evidence that accounts for every possible risk of things being contaminated I'm stunned.

 

[one eyed spy]

And dont forget that the a sample of the LCN DNA was then tested again in NZ after the UK and this concurred with the UK results.

Tested prior 2003 for no result too.

 

[JWS2019]

I thought he said that in regards fibres?

Yeah could be - I thought it was general across path west evidence Will have to look back..

 

[JezzaPerth]

Jezz hasn’t Yovich not commented too much until his independent reports come back?

He got them before Christmas and I imagine they were paper reviews rather than physical testing of samples. Even if there was physical testing that showed something interesting the prosecution and judge will already have the results. Since there has not been even a murmer about that I assume nothing interesting has been found.

 

[JWS2019]

Since there has not been even a murmer about that I assume nothing interesting has been found.

But if they relate to DNA wouldn’t it be used in the coming weeks ?

 

[JezzaPerth]

But if they relate to DNA wouldn’t it be used in the coming weeks ?

It will be lead by Yovich in the defence case. This phase is all about prosecution witnesses and evidence. However that won't stop Yovich using anything interesting in the report to frame his cross questions - especially to Ashley.

So far his cross questions to the other witnesses haven't hinted about any specific contamination. It's all been the usual 'practices are better now aren't they?', 'memories fade with time don't they?', 'and 'oh look! Is that body in the background?' Hardly stellar.

Edit:

P.S. Anything interesting in the reports also allows Carmel to phrase her lead to suit. Nothing obvious so far.

 

[one eyed spy]

Jezz hasn’t Yovich not commented too much until his independent reports come back?

edit:

being they weren’t back at time of opening statements?

Exactly. Seems some here take issue with how others see things, its actually quite off putting.

 

[JezzaPerth]

My view of the importance of evidence is:

- The DNA evidence is being used to prove the Glennon murder charge. It is supported weakly by fibre evidence.
- The fbre evidence is being used to prove the Rimmer murder charge - given the Glennon charge is proved.

If the DNA evidence fails BRE will be aquitted on all murder charges. If the DNA evidence succeeds he will be convicted on Glennon and probably on Rimmer. I think there is only a low probability he will be convicted on Spiers. It will require conviction on both Glennon and Rimmer and even then won't be certain.

 

[FTY1]

For the fact that you dont consider any chance of contamination at any time considering the knowledge they had and the practices many have already admitted to, there's no point continuing the conversation IMO. For all we know, something else was tested in the lab from a totally unrelated crime back in the day for no result which may have been the contaminant. They didn't use new tweezers for starters. If you think you're being presented with all the results & being given all the evidence that accounts for every possible risk of things being contaminated I'm stunned.

Something twigged with me part way through the evidence is that the defence may be calling the "totally unrelated crime" - the Karrakatta rape. That has been where all the questioning has been leading. BRE admitted those and his DNA ended up as part of the CSK murder investigation.

 

[Sir_Loin]

Something twigged with me part way through the evidence is that the defence may be calling the "totally unrelated crime" - the Karrakatta rape. That has been where all the questioning has been leading. BRE admitted those and his DNA ended up as part of the CSK murder investigation.

I think the premise of the question is that the DNA from the Karrakatta rape was somehow cross contaminated with the CSK murders. It’s a complete long shot IMO and I think the defence was really clutching at straws by submitting to the court that its open to finding this as fact.

 

[BonzaRam]

Okay, thanks that looks to be definitive even if I'd thought there were suppression orders over details of the intimate examinations through the autopsy.

This is the ruling on the suppression orders that were challenged.

Conclusion

1. Accordingly on 24 January 2020 I revoked the original suppression order and made a new order in the following terms: There is to be no publication by any means of the evidence of Dr Karin Margolius, Dr Clive Cooke or Dr Alana Buck as to any matter, detail, finding or observation of their examination of the intimate body areas of Ms Glennon or Ms Rimmer. This order applies to both the media and members of the public. Any person present in court is not permitted to communicate these suppressed matters to any person outside the court, including by social media, internet or verbal or written communications.
2. That order was later clarified as not excluding any reporting of opinions of the witnesses regarding the possibility that the victims were sexually assaulted, subject to there being no reporting of any details of the examinations on which such opinions were based.

THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA -v- EDWARDS [No 6] [2020] WASC 22 (31 January 2020)

www.austlii.edu.au

 

[trawlerman]

Something twigged with me part way through the evidence is that the defence may be calling the "totally unrelated crime" - the Karrakatta rape. That has been where all the questioning has been leading. BRE admitted those and his DNA ended up as part of the CSK murder investigation.

That's the trouble when all we've heard for the last few years is the very damning allegations made by the prosecution and statements by police trying to cover their delight in capturing a serial killer - just by alluding to it with a nudge and a wink.
When the defence eventually have their go and counter many arguments put up by the prosecution in the trial and the whole KK rape DNA works in their favour, all the guilty believers like me won't know what to believe.
Luckily, justice Hall is aware of DNA. If he lets BRE off due to contamination then there probably won't be an appeal by the prosecution because I don't think he'll get that important part wrong.

 

[trawlerman]

He got them before Christmas and I imagine they were paper reviews rather than physical testing of samples. Even if there was physical testing that showed something interesting the prosecution and judge will already have the results. Since there has not been even a murmer about that I assume nothing interesting has been found.

Can the defence bring up things that the prosecution has perhaps deliberately left out that point to another person being the CSK?
For example, police deliberately left out the bloodied palm print left at the scene by the killer in the Mallard case.

 

[JezzaPerth]

Can the defence bring up things that the prosecution has perhaps deliberately left out that point to another person being the CSK?
For example, police deliberately left out the bloodied palm print left at the scene by the killer in the Mallard case.

The defence has already said they won't try to blame someone else. So no they won't.

And I have surmised that the reason they said that in opening is becase BRE has privately confessed. By law, Yovich couldn't run a 'someone else did it' defence.

 

[JezzaPerth]

Claremont Superdome?

There is reference in evidence to Claremont Superdome. The only Superd(r)ome in the region is in the City of Nedlands and is a big swimming complex that was called Challenge Stadium in the 1990s. It was only called SuperdRome in 2014 and is usually called HBF stadium. Note difference between evidence about superdome and something that may be it called superdRome, Odd.

 

[JezzaPerth]

I thought Jane Rimmer worked at Nedlands School of Early Learning besides Karrakatta cemetery? How is a Telstra van being in or near Karrakatta cemetery before she was murdered not relevant?

For one thing she appeared to know MM and it's possible she met him at the lunch shop on Government Rd/Coventry St.

 

[FTY1]

Claremont Superdome?

There is reference in evidence to Claremont Superdome. The only Superd(r)ome in the region is in the City of Nedlands and is a big swimming complex that was called Challenge Stadium in the 1990s. It was only called SuperdRome in 2014 and is usually called HBF stadium. Note difference between evidence about superdome and something that may be it called superdRome, Odd.

There was the Burswood Superdome where the Hopman Cup started. Later known as the Burswood Dome.

The Perth Superdrome was in Mt Claremont where the WAIS were located and where the Wildcats played prior to the Perth Entertainment Centre.

Without the Claremont in front it would have been a different place.