Replies to post #12640 on DNAprint Genomics (DNAG)

[terry hallinan]

mingwan0,

>>Just as long as Tony's comments are concerned with interpretation of DNA Witness results (a subject in which he is an expert) and not DNA contamination (a subject in which I respectfully suggest he is not).<<

Does not take much of an expert to discuss DNA transference which it seems was the subject.

DNAP's technology is likely to be quite useful in excluding innocents as well as including the guilty.

The cock-and-bull story by Barry Scheck in the OJ case where strangely the Real Killers DNA was somehow swallowed up by the stronger DNA of OJ nevertheless managed to enhance the reputation of an "expert" who never wrote a paper or obtained any sort of academic or professional expertise outside the temple of liars.

Best, Terry