After I posted yesterday about the DNA in OCCK case, I recalled comments from a reader a few years ago about the hair found in Sloan’s car and its similarity to the DNA sample of Ruth Stebbins. The writer posited that this finding could have been due to tampering with the evidence, a technical error, or a match to the offspring of Ruth Stebbins. This was one of many comments from the reader covering a variety of subjects and they were all insightful.
I turned off the comments section to my blog at the end of September. After reviewing some of the comments I have circled back to, as well as receiving work compiled by other writers since September (who indicate they have no problem with me sharing the content, but requesting input from other readers), I am reactivating the comments function.
As I thought about the earlier comments on the hair found in Sloan’s car and the work recently compiled by another reader, the biggest thing that stands out to me is that MSP D/Sgt. Powell specifically said she noticed the similarity to Ruth Stebbin’s DNA and that she would “check with the lab on this.” There is no indication in the FOIA documents that this ever occurred even though “[i]f it were in fact Mark Stebbins’ hair, this would change everything as far as the direction of this investigation.”
I have no expertise in this area and of course we are limited to information contained in the FOIA documents, because questions are never answered by law enforcement in this case. It appears the “issue” was never clarified by the lab, which is yet another giant red flag in this case.
The evidence was tested at points along the way but the results were apparently never properly evaluated. It was apparently never organized and prepared so it could be addressed by whomever got handed the file (in the never-ending file hand-off that occurs with the OCCK case because it has not been assigned to a dedicated cold case team). Never synthesized so that the head of the state lab could accurately speak with a third-party lab about possible collaboration, instead of starting from square one ALMOST 50 YEARS LATER. This is a project that therefore goes to the bottom of the pile every time just due to the sheer weight of poor practice.
I had to work through the below summary myself to lay out the ridiculousness of a contention that nothing more can be done in the OCCK case. I’m no expert, not by a long-shot, but this might give some perspective:
Nuclear DNA is found in the cell nucleus. It is derived from both parents and while there is a high degree of similarity between siblings and even within families, the unique combination of inherited genes ensures that no two individuals have the exact same nuclear DNA profile. Nuclear DNA evidence was first introduced in a criminal court case in England in 1986. There is apparently no nuclear DNA evidence in the OCCK case.
Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA or mDNA) is found in the mitochondria in the cell cytoplasm surrounding the nucleus. It is passed on from mother to child. Females pass it to the next generation; males cannot. Scientists discovered that mtDNA can be found in hair, teeth and bones, even when the sample is decayed or degraded. A hair with the root attached could be evaluated for nuclear DNA (the root) and mtDNA (inside the hair shaft). There is degraded hair evidence in the OCCK case.
Mitochondrial DNA was used in a criminal case to help convict a man of the rape and murder of a 4-year-old girl in the 1996 case State of Tennessee v. Ware. The mtDNA in hairs found at the crime scene was matched to a saliva sample from Ware. At some point after the Ware conviction, investigators obtained blood samples from the mothers of the OCCK victims. I remember this because my mom told me about it, told me not to worry about it and that nothing would probably come of it.
In 2019, Dr. Ed Green, a a paleogeneticist at the University of California Santa Cruz, created a revolutionary technique to extract nuclear DNA from hair that has long fallen from someone’s head (no root).
That same year Astrea Forensics was founded “to apply ancient DNA techniques and direct genome sequencing to difficult-to-solve forensic casework and the identification of human remains. Astrea’s proprietary methods make it possible to recover genetic profiles from rootless hair and other highly degraded samples that otherwise fail traditional forensic DNA testing. The Astrea® technology will help empower law enforcement and genetic genealogy investigators in their mission to solve cold cases, and determine the identify of unknown individuals, whether days or decades old.”
https://www.astreaforensics.com/who-we-are
Law enforcement in the OCCK is well aware of Astrea Forensics, and their state-of-the-art technology that can focus on degraded samples “so that every possible molecule is recovered. Our technologies are particularly adept for capturing ultrashort DNA fragments; these are fragments lost to traditional methods but are the most common DNA type in rootless hair and other degraded samples.” This technology has been available since 2019.
Y-STRs are short random repeats found on the Y chromosome which is only found in males. The number of repeats at each Y-STR location varies among individuals, allowing for genetic comparisons. There is a partial Y-STR sample that was developed from the vaginal swab from Kristine’s autopsy.
Y-STR evidence was first used in a court case in 1990 in Germany. Y-STR analysis can be used to assist in identifying skeletal remains; to isolate male DNA from that of the victim in sexual assault cases; or in cases where male DNA may be present in small amounts (cases involving blood mixtures, fingernail clippings from victims, or ligatures from strangulation).
The hair evidence in this case (what’s left of it–one hair was used up/extinguished during testing according to FOIA documents) could already have been evaluated by Astrea for possible development of nuclear DNA. The Y-STR sample is a partial sample and the FOIA documents indicate that the state was not willing to pay for additional DNA extraction methods by a third-party lab that could improve typing success beyond a million men with the possible last name of Hunt.
The state and FBI labs do not have these testing capabilities. We are going on years of inaction here. I cannot come up with any legitimate reason to excuse or explain their indolence.
If the state is maintaining they will only consider the hair evidence and the Y-STR and that any further testing of the other evidence in the four homicides will not be considered and if they will not arrange for this more advanced testing by a third party lab or labs, they are saying they are done investigating these crimes. Any pretense of an “active” investigation is therefore laughable and has been for years at this point. The entirety of the files is therefore subject to disclosure under FOIA. (What hasn’t been shredded, that is.)
In 2012 law enforcement was selling us the narrative that this “had to be” a DNA solve. Now, they won’t check the boxes, apparently taking the position that “nothing will come of it,” which is something my mom intuited when they came calling for her blood sample. Looking back I know she knew they were full of shit. It took all her energy to put one foot in front of the other; she wasn’t about to waste a minute thinking about these wheel-spinners.
**As before, comments are moderated and will not post immediately. I try to check the blog once every 24 hours, same with my Proton email, OCCKTruth@protonmail.com.
All comments and emails that make it past the spam filter are read, but not all comments will be posted. I can’t answer every email. Thanks for your understanding.
I have more to post from other readers and respectful comments will be appreciated.