GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-02 > 1202172050


From: marianne dillow <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Recruiting recalcitrant relatives
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:40:50 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <286505.60668.qm@web81608.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


Bob,

Everyone that has posted their responses to your DNA sheriff story has just asked for the story. There are doubts on most of people's minds. How about finding the story and post it so it includes all of the issues that have been raised. That is all that is being asked. Some of us are very curious as to the content of this story. On every posting there are additions or changes in the story.

Marianne Dillow


Robert Stafford <> wrote:
I am amazed that so many people on this list have trouble getting their facts straight. For the umpteenth time, there is chain of custody in some paternity testing and' presumably, all forensic testing. Since there is no known genealogical testing lab in AL, it is safe to assume that it involved other types of testing.

Bob Stafford

marianne dillow <> wrote: Sounds like everyone posting their answers to Bob's "story" agrees as to chain of custody.

Marianne Dillow

Beth Long wrote:
I really think this is not possible, as here is no chain of custody here. Sounds like a rather fanciiful story.

Beth Long

Rebekah Canada wrote:
Bob,

Could you please post a link to the relevant news story? I do not
think that this is the sort of thing any of us want circulated
unverified. I truly am not sure what you meant to accomplish when you
wrote it.

On 2/4/08, Robert Stafford wrote:
...
>
> As I noted, I have no reason to worry about the confidentiality of commercial firms. However, there are some people who do. I was told that a sheriff in Alabama subpoenaed DNA results and/or a sample (not clear which) from a commercial testing firm, raising fears among some about testing.
>
> Bob Stafford




This thread: