Jump to content

Yogurt shop murders

JimmyJames

By JimmyJames
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

Deej

Deej 76811

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

See here’s the deal brisket. I don’t know exactly who killed these girls. Most don’t. 

But what I do know is, enough to put any sort of bat shit a anon followers into an absolute frenzy, is that DNA exists that could solve it. 
 

But apparently nobody cares.

But I don’t post much about that. Why? Because there is actual dna that could solve the crime and starting in 2017 could actually produce a match! So why bother! If nobody cares! 
 

it’s apparently just one of your unsolved mysteries. Oh well.

Unsolved Mysteries GIF by FILMRISE

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Harrison Bergeron

Harrison Bergeron 1798

Posted
Posted
On 12/7/2021 at 4:49 PM, TexasEd said:

The question is are any of the historical suspects related to the person it identified?

That was my initial reaction. Even if the results returned 10,000 suspects, it seems like it would not be a terribly difficult process to run against some other databases and narrow down the list to those that fit an age profile, lived in Austin, during the time of the murders, etc., and then do a little more digging. Maybe I'm completely wrong, but does not feel like there would be 10,000 matches that lived near Austin at the time, were between say 15-60, etc. Then you could do a little detective work and narrow that list down further - it's not like talking to someone is public record, so you could do some interviews and not have to make a big public announcement. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

So I guess the official story now is we had DNA that matched some dude but the FBI couldn’t release the name of the match for bullshit “privacy” reasons. But now we’ve got better testing and gosh darn it, and wouldn’t you know it, it magically no longer matches that dude.
 

Yeah that makes sense. 
 

Edited by JimmyJames
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
  • Author
Posted
40 minutes ago, CooterBrown said:

They could test against the 23andMe database and get some relatives identified. Even Barney Fife could then harrow it down to no more than 3 suspects.

They could but they don't want to. That 48 hour special last night pissed me off. Show interesting camera footage from the past in the 90s and then in the last 5 minutes gloss over the DNA and how now some "expert" (unnamed of course) supposedly no longer thinks it matches (even though it used to) and millions will now believe that bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Reeves

Doc Reeves 6434

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

They could but they don't want to. That 48 hour special last night pissed me off. Show interesting camera footage from the past in the 90s and then in the last 5 minutes gloss over the DNA and how now some "expert" (unnamed of course) supposedly no longer thinks it matches (even though it used to) and millions will now believe that bullshit.

 

Nah, there’s something there having to do with the investigation. Not sure what but the investigators are just not talking about something for some reason.  The thing about being on the sideline of cases is that the cops always know more than anyone else until shit is resolved at trial. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bschoolprof

bschoolprof 6261

Posted
Posted

The quality of the DNA evidence in this case and the extent to which there was ever a "match" to anyone  has been greatly exaggerated in the media. As explained in the latest 48 hours episode, they had 16 (now 25) markers of Y-STR DNA, which is handed down via the paternal line.  This is very low. Forensic genealogists usually work with over a 100 markers. This evidence is great for exclusion; if you don't match to these 16 (or 25), it's not your DNA nor is it anyone else's in the paternal line.  That's why the original guys that were convicted have been excluded.  But if you match with these 16, that doesn't mean much - millions of people in the US will have these same markers. In fact, when APD recently extracted the additional 9 markers through advancements in technology, it was found that 5 of the 9 didn't match the supposed "hit" in the US STR database submitted by the FBI (you can read an excerpt from the FBI letter below).  Thus, this "match" has now been excluded, in the same way as the originally wrongfully-convicted guys were.  Bottom line: I'm not sure there's enough DNA (at least right now) to be much use in this case in terms of finding the needle in haystack.  

image.png.cc1f0ab5ec5b8dddf251f6dd4d4ca302.png

 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
  • Author
Posted
21 minutes ago, bschoolprof said:

The quality of the DNA evidence in this case and the extent to which there was ever a "match" to anyone  has been greatly exaggerated in the media. As explained in the latest 48 hours episode, they had 16 (now 25) markers of Y-STR DNA, which is handed down via the paternal line.  This is very low. Forensic genealogists usually work with over a 100 markers. This evidence is great for exclusion; if you don't match to these 16 (or 25), it's not your DNA nor is it anyone else's in the paternal line.  That's why the original guys that were convicted have been excluded.  But if you match with these 16, that doesn't mean much - millions of people in the US will have these same markers. In fact, when APD recently extracted the additional 9 markers through advancements in technology, it was found that 5 of the 9 didn't match the supposed "hit" in the US STR database submitted by the FBI (you can read an excerpt from the FBI letter below).  Thus, this "match" has now been excluded, in the same way as the originally wrongfully-convicted guys were.  Bottom line: I'm not sure there's enough DNA (at least right now) to be much use in this case in terms of finding the needle in haystack.  

image.png.cc1f0ab5ec5b8dddf251f6dd4d4ca302.png

 

Has that DNA been submitted to CODIS? 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89686

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, CooterBrown said:

They could test against the 23andMe database and get some relatives identified. Even Barney Fife could then harrow it down to no more than 3 suspects.

Not that easy.  The DNA they still have remaining from what they were able to extract 30 years ago is not as good as you'd get from spitting in the tube and sending it off to Ancestry.  It could easily rope in tens or even hundreds of thousands of people.  The DNA people will be more careful than those who rounded up the four guys.

If they were confident they could get a positive, they would have already been working that angle, but they can't get any better DNA sample than what they have left from 30 years ago, so it probably is best to wait a while and see where things go in terms of DNA testing.

What they need is an actual lead on suspects outside of DNA, then they can make some comparisons, and using the rough DNA samples they have, they can even exclude those suspects.

1 hour ago, JimmyJames said:

and then in the last 5 minutes gloss over the DNA and how now some "expert" (unnamed of course) supposedly no longer thinks it matches (even though it used to) and millions will now believe that bullshit.

I haven't watched the interview, but I'm guessing that it's Cece Moore - she's an "expert" and works a lot of this high-profile kind of stuff (she's very good at self-promotion) and she does these types of shows (she even has her own show or two on broadcast TV).  She's not classically trained in genetics, and is mostly self-taught, but she has the right people around her that are trained in genetics, she has the resources, and most likely in something like this, she's going to be careful about what she says.  

I've talked to her in email, and also in-person at a conference, and she knows her stuff.  People bag on her because she's not classically trained in genetics, but she's one of those types who saw a huge opportunity 10 or 15 years ago when genetic genealogy as a field was starting to hit the mainstream, and she busted her ass to learn everything she could.

There are plenty of geneticists in the world who don't understand the documentation side of genealogy and how you properly find people who are not in the databases, and plenty of genealogists who don't understand things like genetic markers, probabilities, etc..  

As I said, she has geneticists around her, and it's not that hard to upload DNA data into a database - the harder part is actually taking all of the resulting hits from distant relatives (who are in the database) of the suspect (who is usually not in the database), and working out a paper trail that will stand up in a court of law and/or be enough for a search warrant to get an actual DNA sample to compare.

edit: bschoolprof had a better summary of some of that.

Edited by atomheartbevo
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bschoolprof

bschoolprof 6261

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Has that DNA been submitted to CODIS? 

I've never seen anything definitive on that. I'm unclear whether it is possible, as I'm not enough of an expert to know if this limited Y-STR sample can even be submitted to CODIS.  The AAS reported in 2009 that, at least at the time, the sample could not be submitted to federal databases like CODIS.  That may have changed though.  I would be shocked if it is now possible but hasn't been done.  Even if it was though, you still have the massive "false positive" problem I mentioned above.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Harrison Bergeron

Harrison Bergeron 1798

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, bschoolprof said:

The quality of the DNA evidence in this case and the extent to which there was ever a "match" to anyone  has been greatly exaggerated in the media. As explained in the latest 48 hours episode, they had 16 (now 25) markers of Y-STR DNA, which is handed down via the paternal line.  This is very low. Forensic genealogists usually work with over a 100 markers. This evidence is great for exclusion; if you don't match to these 16 (or 25), it's not your DNA nor is it anyone else's in the paternal line.  That's why the original guys that were convicted have been excluded.  But if you match with these 16, that doesn't mean much - millions of people in the US will have these same markers. In fact, when APD recently extracted the additional 9 markers through advancements in technology, it was found that 5 of the 9 didn't match the supposed "hit" in the US STR database submitted by the FBI (you can read an excerpt from the FBI letter below).  Thus, this "match" has now been excluded, in the same way as the originally wrongfully-convicted guys were.  Bottom line: I'm not sure there's enough DNA (at least right now) to be much use in this case in terms of finding the needle in haystack.  

image.png.cc1f0ab5ec5b8dddf251f6dd4d4ca302.png

I thought they did a decent job of explaining the DNA issue at least as matching goes. I think of it is a a funnel, where they had 16 Y-STR markers, which indicated 30M people (I'm making up the #s), then with 25 the funnel narrowed to 10M people, and the person mentioned was excluded. You ultimately narrow the funnel with additional markers, which leads to one person.

What I do not understand is the difference among samples - not a biologist but I thought on the DNA / cellular level saliva, semen, blood, skin cells, etc., carried full DNA profiles. Said more simply, in my ignorant mind if you had DNA you "had it all," i.e. a complete profile. I get technology has improved to be able to get better results from smaller samples, but the analysis being done with touch DNA is mind-blowing. Hoping for a surly biologist to explain it to me. 

There was a cold case recently cracked in Fort Worth, where they were able to use a tiny amount of DNA on the victim's bra and dress to find a match.

It is crazy that in 30 years no one has ever confessed to someone while drunk, stoned, etc., or could just keep it in without telling someone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 2/7/2022 at 11:37 AM, TexasEd said:

Something I may have missed but are they saying the 4 guys that were originally suspects/convicted (Scott, Springsteen, et al) are now excluded because the DNA does not match them?

The evidence says they have been excluded but the authorities that be don’t say that. The official position is still to this day those four did it but they say just can’t prove it, despite DNA evidence to the contrary. 
 

Since it appears it’s never gonna get solved, despite DNA evidence, I think I’m soon gonna just start posting what I know about this case one post at a time every few days or so, backed up by cites to sources, and hope I don’t eventually get the Epstein treatment. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Gimp

The Gimp 346

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

The evidence says they have been excluded but the authorities that be don’t say that. The official position is still to this day those four did it but they say just can’t prove it, despite DNA evidence to the contrary. 
 

Since it appears it’s never gonna get solved, despite DNA evidence, I think I’m soon gonna just start posting what I know about this case one post at a time every few days or so, backed up by cites to sources, and hope I don’t eventually get the Epstein treatment. 

Might want to do that on one of the boards with limited access.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChickenSandwich

ChickenSandwich 9841

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

The evidence says they have been excluded but the authorities that be don’t say that. The official position is still to this day those four did it but they say just can’t prove it, despite DNA evidence to the contrary. 
 

Since it appears it’s never gonna get solved, despite DNA evidence, I think I’m soon gonna just start posting what I know about this case one post at a time every few days or so, backed up by cites to sources, and hope I don’t eventually get the Epstein treatment. 

Question, the DNA is from an assumed sexual assault?

If so, are they claiming the 4 did the murder but not the sexual assault?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
  • Author
Posted
36 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Question, the DNA is from an assumed sexual assault?

If so, are they claiming the 4 did the murder but not the sexual assault?

No the working theory now is that there must have been a fifth unidentified guy who was with them at the time even though there is no mention of him in their supposed “confessions.”

Its ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89686

Posted
Posted

This is the stuff that makes people think DNA solves everything.

This was a murder from 1984, and the suspect died in 1980.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/10/us/hazleton-pennsylvania-cold-case-solved-trnd/index.html

Quote

On March 18, 1964, Chiverella left her house to walk to school. She was last seen alive around 8:10 a.m., according to Pennsylvania State Police. After 1 p.m., her body was discovered in coal refuse pit. Investigators determined she was sexually assaulted, murdered and left in the hole with all her belongings......

Quote

The case went cold until 2007 when the state's DNA lab was able to develop the suspect's DNA profile using fluid that was left on Chiverella's jacket. Police were hoping this was the break in the case they needed, but the DNA didn't return any matches.

"Police checked the database monthly against all other criminals that had DNA in the system," said Brutosky.

Quote

In 2019, with help from Parabon Nano-Labs, the DNA profile was uploaded to GED Match, a genealogical database. Through that, police were able the get their first genealogical match: a very distant relative, possibly a 6th cousin, according to Brutosky.

For reference, I have several thousand 4th - 6th on Ancestry.com, but this is through GED Match, which is basically what genealogists use to compare DNA from various services, so it doesn't have as many samples as the commercial services, but the samples it does have are usually tied to active researchers with extensive family trees.  I'm oversimplifying, but if you get a hit in GED Match, you probably have a higher chance of finding somebody as you aren't wading through thousands of matches.

Quote

In 2020, genealogist Eric Schubert contacted the state police offering to help free of charge and lend his unique skill set of tracing down family trees to find matches. Schubert, only 18 at the time, had assisted other police departments on several cold cases.

"Mr. Schubert began genealogical work on the family tree of our match and very shortly we were provided names of relatives who were scattered throughout the country," a police statement said. "We were fortunate enough to have most of the related family cooperate and provide us their DNA samples."

They confirmed it by digging up the body of the suspect.

Quote

The investigation determined that Forte was the suspect in Chiverella's death. Forte would have been 22 at the time of the crime. He died in 1980 of natural causes, possibly a heart attack, according to police. 

To confirm, Forte was exhumed last month so that investigators could take a DNA sample to match the suspect's profile. On February 3, the result confirmed his DNA matched.

Shitty analogies ahoy!

Quote

"To put the numbers in perspective, it is estimated that there have only been 117 billion people who have ever inhabited earth," the police statement said. "In order to find another match to Mr. Forte you would need to search over 4 million planet earths."

Quote

This is fourth oldest cold case to be solved in in the country using genetic genealogy and the oldest in the state of Pennsylvania, according to state police Cpl. Mark Baron. Over 230 department personnel had a hand in the investigation over the years, without including civilians in the crime lab, Baron added.

Forte's name never came up over the years, police said, and they believe this was a random attack. 

Quote

In 1974, Forte plead guilty to aggravated assault and served a year of probation, according to Baron. In 1978, he was arrested for recklessly endangering and harassment, police said.

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

Here's a list of the usual suspects we'd like to bring in for questioning on the murder, Chief.

"I never heard of half these guys.  The ones I do know have alibis.  And this guy here is dead!" 

Well, cross him off then.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beau Vine

Beau Vine 54246

Posted
Posted
On 2/6/2022 at 12:25 PM, JimmyJames said:

So I guess the official story now is we had DNA that matched some dude but the FBI couldn’t release the name of the match for bullshit “privacy” reasons. But now we’ve got better testing and gosh darn it, and wouldn’t you know it, it magically no longer matches that dude.
 

I think it's clear that this guy's DNA was changed when he got the Covid "vaccine!!!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bevo

Bevo 13577

Posted
Posted

I drive by the location of the yogurt shop every day and pointed out the location to my wife as we drove by an hour ago. Can someone give me a short rundown of what happened so I can explain it to my wife? She doesn't know the story and I only know what I've read here.

In X year, 2-4 perps entered the yogurt shop and raped and killed 4 girls who were working at the shop. They then burned the shop down to hide the evidence. They don't know who did it because of shoddy police work. There are rumors that... It is infamous because the girls were young and it is a cold case...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...