The Paternity Test

[Penny]

Wish we had an IEM - http://www.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/ - to bet on when the results will be disclosed.

Wouldn't be surprised if Lorraine and the crew is trying to get the DNA of the real father and pin it on DS.

[Daryl Fawcett]

I will admit that the delay of the results doesn't look good to them.

[Stan]

So no results yet?

[proffaberf451]

So no results yet?

There a few things we can be certain of . . .

1. There are results!
2. Dr. Day does have them!
3. They prove she was wrong!
4. The Consortium doesn't know how to spin them to implicate Danny and/or Brandy.
5. It will be longer yet before they will reveal the results.

Pride goeth before a fall . . .

[Penny]

So no results yet?

There a few things we can be certain of . . .

1. There are results!
2. Dr. Day does have them!
3. They prove she was wrong!
4. The Consortium doesn't know how to spin them to implicate Danny and/or Brandy.
5. It will be longer yet before they will reveal the results.

Pride goeth before a fall . . .

Is there anything being said in the "behind the scenes" threads over on the other site, about the test results?

[proffaberf451]

So no results yet?

There a few things we can be certain of . . .

1. There are results!
2. Dr. Day does have them!
3. They prove she was wrong!
4. The Consortium doesn't know how to spin them to implicate Danny and/or Brandy.
5. It will be longer yet before they will reveal the results.

Pride goeth before a fall . . .

Is there anything being said in the "behind the scenes" threads over on the other site, about the test results?

I just received the following information via email.

"The item submitted as a specimen from 15735 AF is excluded as the father of the item submitted as a specimen from 15735 CH []"

The results are in and Dr. Day has been proven wrong. This now calls into question anything else she has claimed in her fight against Danny Shelton.

proff

[Breezy]

To see the DNA test results better, right click on the page (what proff posted above) and then click on "open link" in the box that appears. Then you can read it.

[Daryl Fawcett]

Interesting, but what does the last paragraph mean?

[The Red Baron]

Interesting, but what does the last paragraph mean?

I presume it references the fact that "home" collection kits were used rather than actually going to the lab to have the samples taken. I understand that Dr. Day considers that she was the expert involved with the collection.

I find your reaction of "interesting" to be hilarious. Thanks for the laugh.

[proffaberf451]

Interesting, but what does the last paragraph mean?

Daryl,

Your post is sorrowfully disingenuous. "Interesting?"

The last paragraph is a legal disclaimer, nothing more, nothing less. Your attempting to subtly argue the same vein as Robert is on AT. Let me ask you a questions, do you think that the lab that processed the samples is suggesting that it's work is not reliable? Do you think the lab is admitting the results are not accurate?

Let's look at the facts, Daryl:

1. Dr. Day made her accusation and claimed it was accurate because she "saw" Brandy at 3ABN long before anyone else did. Remember there are more people who testify that she was not there when Dr. Day claims she was, than agree with Dr. Day.

2. Dr. Day made her accusations a public issue. She also brought the Joy Pickle Consortium into the process and they joined in her accusations with great glee.

3. Dr. Day choose the testing kit

4. Dr. Day choose the testing lab

5. Dr. Day choose the time and agreed to the location of the test

6. Dr. Day considers herself "expert" enough to handle the collection of the samples

7. Dr. Day collected the sample

8. Dr. Day either packaged or supervised the packaging of the testing materials

9. Dr. Day either mailed or supervised the mailing of the materials to be tested

Now, in the event you were planning to come back and raise the other J/P Consortium arguments, let me address some of them now.

The suggestion that the child at the test was someone other than the child in question is simply ridiculous. Why? Let's look at some more facts:

1. Dr. Day had the passport photo of the child in question

2. Dr. Day claims to have observed the child in question on a 3ABN telecast

3. Dr. Day collected the sample, thus was less than two feet from the subject

4. Dr. Day admits that the child was not covered by any object during the act of swabbing, thus she had a clear view of the child's face

Therefore, Dr. Day is either admitting to a level of incompetence, when she makes the wondering accusation about the identity of the child, or this is Plan B.

From the beginning Dr. Day was adamant about her accusations. She claimed she knew, definitively, that she was right. She demanded the parameters of the testing, she chose the processing lab, she selected the testing kits, she took the samples, and she mailed the samples. Nothing, was in the hands of Danny Shelton, Brandy Shelton, or one of their advocates.

Giving Dr. Day all the benefit of the doubt,that she is a highly educated and competent individual. She claims to have observed the child in question on television more than once. She had a copy of the child's purported passport in her possession and reviewed it before taking the sample from the child. So she has established that she would be able to identify the child. Television, Passport, Real life. If she is competent, she would have been able to know at that point if the child at the testing, the photo from the passport, and the child she observed in the televised broadcast were indeed all one and the same. Not difficult.

Before the testing was done, there needed to be a fall back position, a Plan B, so-to-speak. This was developed and posited as soon as possible. Why? Because Dr. Day needed to be able to maintain her viability, if the test results did not support her. Also, she was relying on third party accusations to make her own accusations. Thus, she needed to have a way in which to discredit her own work, if the results were not what she had hoped for. You see, she didn't know for sure, she just trusted her third party source.

The results, prove she was wrong. The results prove her third party source was wrong. The results prove that the Joy Pickle Consortium doesn't care about the truth or fact checking their sources, they just want anything they can use to disparage Danny Shelton and 3ABN - no scruples.

Daryl, you have to ask yourself, "As the truth has unfolded, as the courts have looked at the "evidence," as the house of cards has come tumbling down around Gailon Joy and Robert Pickle, who are you going to believe?" This scientific evidence can not be refuted. Robert is over on AT desperately trying to, but he can't because it is irrefutable science. It is time to admit the truth - that you were an integral part of a very evil endeavor.

- proff