The man decided to not stop at the girls’ destination, so they tried to get out of the station wagon, but were unable to.
— Read on wibc.com/234709/how-investigators-solved-an-indiana-cold-case-from-1975/
Discover more from The Oakland County Child Killer
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
If only there were physical evidence viable for comparison in the OCCK case, but unfortunately there is not.
Has a third-party lab specializing in degraded evidence (like Othram) evaluated the evidence?
In some of the recent solves in very old cold cases (which I have posted on my blog), a third-party lab has been able to develop nuclear DNA with evidence that was previously tested unsuccessfully by both a state lab and the FBI. It may be that the state knows how mishandled and improperly stored the OCCK evidence was/is and therefore is unwilling to spend the time or money to arrange to use a lab like Othram. They have used Othram to help solve other Michigan cold cases, so they know what the deal is. There is also grant money available and other sources to fund this expense. So I’m having a hard time with understanding why (as always), the OCCK case is “different.”
Maybe the state lab has tested, retested, extinguished evidence right and left. I have seen a 12-page spread sheet of the evidence in this case–in tiny font. In one entry, for example, it says the sample had been marked refrigerate upon return, but it was not. The state has backed itself into a corner on this one. You can’t take the position that the only way there will be answers in this case is if there is a DNA hit and then rely only on the partial mtDNA from a couple of hairs and a partial Y-str developed decades too late. The evidence has to be evaluated by a third-party lab who will say yay/nay on nuclear DNA, or the state lab has to explain on the record how all of the evidence was tested and/or retested, and explain the logical reasons for failure to obtain evidence (collection, handling, storage). Why the avoidance of leading edge technology? Transparency and an apology is the last card these people have to play if they want to keep their shirts on.
I want acknowledgement of the major mistakes in this case and the bad practices. I want action taken on the evidence that still exists by a third-party lab. If there is some reason to justify going no further with testing, someone from the state lab should go on the record and clear this up. Whoever has to grant permission for the lab to talk on the record needs to do it. Maybe someone like a Scott Burnstein, who has done investigative crime reporting and is also an attorney, could sit down with lab employees and get the straight story about why we are now hung up on the DNA evidence after being told for years that this is a “DNA-only” solve situation. How convenient if the only DNA evidence in this case is inadequate for comparison. Finally, I want an explanation of what safeguards are now in place to prevent a clusterfuck like this in the future.