State's response to Echol's mnotion for new trial.

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[112885]

112885 Posts in 8614 Topics by 4618 Members
Latest Member: garrymoore

[Farm]

http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/de_state_response.pdf

"It is DNA evidence -  not any other evidence - that must establish aqquittal by compelling evidence. The statute, after all, is designed to permit such testing so that a petitioner can prove his innocence with it's results, not to re-weigh or otherwise re-examine trial evidence.  The "other evidence" is as against those results not in service of them.  That is to say, it is other evidence of guilt regardless of whether it was introduced at trial.  Were it otherwise, as in Echol's limitless interpretation of the phraise, the statute would be nothing more than a vehicle to retry the entire case again, which it certainly is not."

It's almost as if the DNA results are the only evidence that will be considered.

And I love this one:

"The third party admissions in this case inculpate Echols. Whatever disputes he has over their reliability, they cannot be rejected simply because he has a post-homocide, post-appeal, post-rule 37 theory of the case"

[DogIsYourName]

It was a good read.  Well written.  I can tell the State has really worked hard on this, and I think they will win.

That said, there are two things I wish were in this reply that are not:

1) An analysis of the possible mixture on the penile swab, similar to the analysis provided by LCN.  This could motivate Baldwin or Echols to test the other swab to try to show the mixture was just a contamination as suggested in the Bode email attached as a state exhibit.  As it stands, they definitely will not test this further.

2) Mention of Damien's necklace or Jessie's shirt.  The standard calls for considering ALL evidence in light of the new DNA evidence, and the necklace was certainly evidence against Damien.  If the State had brought those items up here, it might have given Damien motivation to test the blood on those items.  Now, there is really no reason for them to ever test these items.

-dog

[Farm]

This could motivate Baldwin or Echols to test the other swab to try to show the mixture was just a contamination

In the Defense's claim, they cite a foreign allele as being exculpatory.

Why would the Defense try and refute their own evidence by dismissing the "mixture" as contamination?

If the State had brought those items up here, it might have given Damien motivation to test the blood on those items.

At this point, it doesn't matter what their "motivation" is - they don't get any further testing, any more than they get the opportunity to retry this case.

[DogIsYourName]

In the Defense's claim, they cite a foreign allele as being exculpatory.

Why would the Defense try and refute their own evidence by dismissing the "mixture" as contamination?

They wouldn't.  I'm talking about the additional swabs from the other penis or from the bindings - the possible mixtures that could include Damien's and Jason's DNA.  The ones that the State did not make any mention of.  I mean, if the foreign allele is significant, then surely the possible mixtures are as well?  The Defense would have had to test the other swabs to try to eliminate Damien and Jason as DNA donors.

The people at Bode already stated that the mixtures are likely contaminations and do not yeild worthwhile results.  But it would be nice to test the other swabs and find out.

[Farm]

The people at Bode already stated that the mixtures are likely contaminations

You're lying your ass off, Dog.

You know that, right?



Why would Bode suggest further testing on samples they felt were likely contaminated?

[DogIsYourName]

Wrong email Farm.  Look through the State's exhibits, just after the email you attached.

But I am with you -- I wish the extra swabs were tested.  That's why it would've been nice if the State had made the argument that LCN posted on these boards.  It could've forced Echols to really dig deeper on these things in the brief period of time between now an their Federal appeal.

[Farm]

Wrong email Farm.  Look through the State's exhibits, just after the email you attached.

I have, Dog.

And Bode has NEVER said the samples were likely contaminated as you claimed.

I wish the extra swabs were tested.

Which shows that you KNOW Bode never said the samples were likely contaminated.

Pretty pathetic of you IMO.

[DogIsYourName]

Farm, you should know by now that I do not lie.  Technically, it was the Arkansas State Crime Laboratory, which analyzed the Bode results.  Behold, an extract from the May 27, 2008 letter:

In reviewing the data from 2504-114-34AB (Branch ligatures combined), both the Bode analyst as well
as our DNA analysts indicate that there is an elevated baseline. Bode also points out that there is an
imbalance at amelogenin (gender determining region) and D3S1358 and that a possible mixture is
present specifically at D5S818. (When few copies ofDNA template are present, stochastic amplification may
occur, resulting in either a substantial imbalance of two alleles at a given heterozygous locus or allelic dropout).
In reviewing the data from 2504-114-050 (Penile 5wab - Moore), both the Bode analyst as well as our
DNA analysts indicate that there is an elevated baseline. It is noted by Bode that a possible mixture is
present specifically at D5S818. Bode recognizes that this is a possible mixture, not in fact a mixture. In
reviewing the data from sample No: 2S04-114-34AB and comparing it to sample No: 2S04-114-05D the
potential mixture is not consistent (coming from the same individuals). This would indicate potential
contamination or stochastic activity.

In reviewing the data from 2504-114-10£ (Penile swab - Branch), both the Bode analyst as well as our
DNA analysts indicate that there is an elevated baseline. It is noted by the Arkansas State Crime
Laboratory DNA analysts that the '8' allele at D16S539 in question is too low in comparison to
surrounding baseline noise. Other potential peaks exist that are very similar in size (RFU's) that are not
identified.

In reviewing all of this data, it is noted that the quality and quantity of the results obtained are very
limited and require extreme caution in its interpretation. In rendering an opinion of this data, one
cannot overlook the facts in this case: The three victims in this case were nude and submerged in
water for between 18 to 24 hours prior to discovery. It is very unlikely that any interpretable DNA
profile other than that due to contamination or that of the victims would be recoverable. Based on the
Bode analyst's letter, it is clear that the data provided is questionable at best. The analyst uses
"possible" and "suggests" to describe the data. Amy Jeanguenat documents that there is clearly a
"possible mixture" present, not a "mixture present". She also indicates "elevated baseline", "primer
peaks", "and imbalance".

It is clear that the data represented thus far by Bode, referenced above, is suspect at best. It is well
documented that limited quantities of DNA, as noted in these samples and demonstrated by the quality
of partial (at best) alleles obtained in this case, is' too limited to render any opinion for comparison
purposes.

It is my opinion that the alleles and possible mixtures are due to contamination and/or stochastic
effects and no conclusive interpretation is possible.
SIGNED:

Kermit Channell II, Executive Direcotr, DNA Technical Leader

Mary Robnett, CODIS Administrator, DNA Analyst

Chris Glaze, DNA Analyst


You can't always be smooth, but your beer should be.

Sin-cerely,
dog

[MachaSidhe]

The forgien allele the defense and supporters have been touting to try to further bolster their claims of innocence is suspected as potential contamination from the labs?

I'm confused.

Macha

[DogIsYourName]

Hi Macha,

I read the crime lab's opinion as directed towards the two swabs that contained possible mixtures, not the swab that had the foreign allele.  Basically, it seems to help the "exclusion" theory.  This might be why the State did not challenge Echols under LCN-like analysis, but I would still like to have seen it raised.

EDIT -- ALSO, the last line of the letter DOES appear to allude to the foreign allele as well.

-dog

Not to fan the flames, but it also goes back to when I questioned Bode's use of the term "possible mixtures" but was told by LCN and Farm that mixtures were definitely present because there was a third number.  Basically, the crime lab is saying the third number is likely contamination, hence the use of the term "possible mixture."

[Farm]

Farm, you should know by now that I do not lie.

But you DID lie, Dog.

You claimed Bode said the foreign allele was likely the result of contamination, which was incredibly stupid since the Defense used Bode's conclusion in the writ to indicate an alternate suspect.

I even asked you why they would suggest further testing on a sample they felt was likely contaminated - remember?

Technically, it was the Arkansas State Crime Laboratory, which analyzed the Bode results.

That's a rather pathetic way to admit you were wrong, isn't it?

[DogIsYourName]

No Farm.

I said the mixtures were likely contaminations.  That's why Bode used the term "possible mixtures," as the Arkansas State Crime lab explains.  My mistake for saying that Bode explained it, but the point remains EXACTLY the same.

You can read can't you?  I posted the important parts just above, with bolds, italics, and underlines.

-dog 

[MachaSidhe]

Dog,

How would a possible contamination help with excluding anyone? Wouldn't that just lead to further inconclusive results which most were?

Inconclusive results doesn't give a good showing of actual innocence. Though it helps the state's claim more then Echol's it still offers nothing as far as dna claims go.

Macha

[Farm]

No Farm.

I said the mixtures were likely contaminations.

Here's what you said, you incredible lying asshole:

The people at Bode already stated that the mixtures are likely contaminations

Don't try to back-peddle now.

My mistake for saying that Bode explained it, but the point remains EXACTLY the same.

No it doesn't, dipshit.

Bode did NOT think the results were due to contamination - they even reccomended further testing.

Jesus you are so pathetic.

[DogIsYourName]

Macha,

I think I agree with you.  While it does help them say that the DNA results do not include the WM3, it also makes those results not worth very much.  So, basically, even if their DNA does not show up, you would not expect it to because the bodies were in the water for too long.

It does undermine LCN's theory though, which is the one I wanted to see the State persue.

-dog.