The Soiled underwear belonging to Sheila - catalyst for foul play!

[David1819]

Even identical twins don't have the same profiles in either bloods or DNA. Something's not right is it ?

That may be the case with modern forensic and medical testing.

But back then a large fraction of the world population would have the same blood results as what was found in the silencer.

[lookout]

Neither of Sheila's children had the gene, which is more prevalent in males and chances are it could have passed to one of them.  Because the blood profiling was as it was it doesn't mean to say it was Sheila's, we were only told that.

I remember it being said that all ? the Boutflour family had this gene. That being the case then possibly just the male members, but what are the chances of a complete stranger within the family also having this same gene ?

[lookout]

That may be the case with modern forensic and medical testing.

But back then a large fraction of the world population would have the same blood results as what was found in the silencer.

Not with the AK1 profile.

[Caroline]

Even identical twins don't have the same profiles in either bloods or DNA. Something's not right is it ?

Yes they do, they are from the same fertilized egg .......... (Edit) or at least initially. However, it seems subtle difference in DNA emerge throughout life. Same blood group though.

This is quite interesting;

https://www.biotechniques.com/omics/not-so-identical-twins/

[lookout]

Yes they do, they are from the same fertilized egg .......... (Edit) or at least initially. However, it seems subtle difference in DNA emerge throughout life. Same blood group though.

This is quite interesting;

https://www.biotechniques.com/omics/not-so-identical-twins/

Neither of the twin boys had inherited the gene which I find a bit odd, though they both had the same blood grouping as each other which was obviously their father's. 

[David1819]

Not with the AK1 profile.

AK1 = AK1  nothing more

PS: This is going a bit off topic

[lookout]

There's only so much that you can discuss concerning soiled underwear 

[David1819]

There's only so much that you can discuss concerning soiled underwear 

Not in this case. obviously.

[lookout]

Not in this case. obviously.

Is it relevant though David ?

[David1819]

Is it relevant though David ?

Very much so

[lookout]

Very much so

I asked the question because there are so many other factors to the way the case was handled and wasn't sure if this particular subject was as pressing as others.

[David1819]

I asked the question because there are so many other factors to the way the case was handled and wasn't sure if this particular subject was as pressing as others.

In case you did not know. Quite a few people here suspect the soiled underwear is the source of the blood flake found in the silencer.

[lookout]

In case you did not know. Quite a few people here suspect the soiled underwear is the source of the blood flake found in the silencer.

I'm not sure about that at all.
 What I'd like to know about the silencer is, do they state anywhere on the silencer the number of baffles they contain ?

[Jane]

I'm struggling to understand how "quite a few people" thought/still think? such blood could be extricated from previously soaked garments, regardless of what the garments were. Eg, quite naturally, the garment, already having shed some blood content from having been soaked in water which may very possibly have had some sort of detergent added to it, would have needed to be dried prior to the removal of the 'material', after which the likelihood of collecting "a flake" becomes seriously diminished. Then there is the fact that dried blood oxidises very quickly and bears no resemblance to the "blob of jam" it was claimed to. Short of a family member having a Phd in science or being able to persuade a friendly scientist to do a bit of 'overtime' in a conveniently placed laboratory, I fail to see, without going into realms of the fantastic, how occurred anything like it. 

[David1819]

I'm struggling to understand how "quite a few people" thought/still think? such blood could be extricated from previously soaked garments, regardless of what the garments were. Eg, quite naturally, the garment, already having shed some blood content from having been soaked in water which may very possibly have had some sort of detergent added to it, would have needed to be dried prior to the removal of the 'material', after which the likelihood of collecting "a flake" becomes seriously diminished. Then there is the fact that dried blood oxidises very quickly and bears no resemblance to the "blob of jam" it was claimed to. Short of a family member having a Phd in science or being able to persuade a friendly scientist to do a bit of 'overtime' in a conveniently placed laboratory, I fail to see, without going into realms of the fantastic, how occurred anything like it.

Menstrual blood is known to contain flakes of clotted blood among other bits that will form flakes once dry.

To say you need a scientist with a PHD is nonsense.

What do you believe to be the source of the blood?