9/11 : The Identification Loop

[who]

Since the event as a whole centers around “Arab ‘terrist’ hijackers”, you need to A) establish them beyond reasonable doubt, B) place them undeniably at the scene of the crime when the crime took place.


The Identification Loop

Since identification is “the key”, actual individual’s DNA, “hijackers’ DNA”, obtained from the alive individual itself, thus PRIOR to the event, is needed otherwise you cannot match and thus establish identity - which still doesn’t mean that much actually. DNA at the scene of the crime does not necessarily proof A) you were there, B) you were there at that particular time.

Hijackers usually become known as such AFTER the fact, as is the case here. So, where do the prior DNA samples, and thus prior identification, come from?


DNA

DNA found in rental cars and hotel rooms booked?

Other people did not rent and use the same cars and did not book and occupy the same rooms - which might mean DNA traces as well? So, how do we know who is who without prior identification? Besides, it places you, at best, in a car and in a hotel room - not in a plane.

Whatever way you’d like to turn this, you’ll get stuck because the actual existence of hijackers was never established in the first place. We were, and are, being TOLD hijackers are involved. BIG difference.


The whole DNA thing is moot anyway.

You’ll realize for what reason when you find the answer to the following:

According science, human DNA exposed to heat (fire or any other heat source) for a certain amount of time and exceeding a certain temperature detracted from non-living tissue, if at all possible, is rendered useless.


The Chain

In order to establish “Arab ‘terrist’ hijackers”, you need to do so

A : in an unbroken chain of proven facts/events

B : by eliminating all other possibilities

When not A and B, no C : no case.



“No corpse, No crime”

When you cannot establish A and B, no C and the whole thing comes crumbling down.

[donnieb]

First of all, this is not a court of law. Strict rules of evidence as suggested in your post are not required in these discussions.

Second, you are quite wrong about what is required to convict someone of a crime. DNA is definitely not needed. There are many crimes in which DNA is not available or would play no decisive role in the proceedings. Identity can be established in many ways other than DNA. If this were not the case, there would never have been any criminal convictions prior to 1980 or so.

As a matter of fact, it is not even necessary to have physical evidence to convict someone of a crime. Defense attorneys often protest that the evidence in a particular case is "circumstantial", as if that made it worthless. But many, many convictions are based on entirely circumstantial evidence. Many, many murderers have been convicted even without a corpus dilecti (though that's a tough challenge for the state).

The only requirement for a criminal conviction in the United States is that the prosecution must convince the jury of the accused's guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt". Your pleadings here would not raise reasonable doubt in my mind, were I a juror in a 9/11 case.

Oh, and FYI: the word is "terrorist", not "terrist". (I only mention this because you misspelled it twice in the same way, so it doesn't seem to be a typo.)

[gillianren]

donnieb said:

Many, many murderers have been convicted even without a corpus dilecti (though that's a tough challenge for the state).

No. They've been convicted without a corpse, but that's entirely different. A corpus delicti is a body of the crime, and without one, you won't get a conviction. Heck, you won't even get a trial; the judge would throw it out of court.

In this case, we definitely have a corpus delicti. Beyond a reasonable doubt, DNA or no DNA. (I'm also reasonably sure that the state is perfectly aware that other people could have used those hotel rooms and have followed a reasonable process of eliminating those other possible donors.) We have evidence that certain people boarded certain airplanes and sat in certain seats. We have evidence that the people in those seats hijacked the planes. Besides, if they boarded the planes, where else would they have gone?

[frenat]

When exposed to fire for a long period of time there is still some DNA that can be found in bone marrow and teeth.

[pzkpfw]

who said:

According science, human DNA exposed to heat (fire or any other heat source) for a certain amount of time and exceeding a certain temperature detracted from non-living tissue, if at all possible, is rendered useless.

So, they faked DNA identification of the victims just so they could pretend to have identified the hijackers; when anyone can so easily tell it's all fake because of the effects, as you point out, of fire?

That's a stretch.

(I put they in italics because this also means the scientists doing the analysis were thus "in on it". Or, the people who supplied them with substitute DNA were. Or...)

[donnieb]

gillianren said:

donnieb said:

Many, many murderers have been convicted even without a corpus dilecti (though that's a tough challenge for the state).

No. They've been convicted without a corpse, but that's entirely different. A corpus delicti is a body of the crime, and without one, you won't get a conviction.

Arrgh. I knew that.

What's really annoying is that I've made that very mistake before and should have known better (about both the definition and spelling).

That confession made, I stand by my initial point: that the OP is greatly in error on the question of evidentiary standards.

[gillianren]

donnieb said:

That confession made, I stand by my initial point: that the OP is greatly in error on the question of evidentiary standards.

And your original point is quite right, Donnie. (Good to have you here, btw.) It's just a minor nit that I am physically incapable of not picking. (If it's any consolation, I double-checked my spelling before I posted.)

[PhantomWolf]

Actually there is far more to go on that just the DNA.

Check in staff ID'ed them, the airport security cameras have them on tape, in at least one case a stewardess identified them to the FAA by Airphone, and their names were on the real manifests (not the published victim lists that the CT sites like to bandy about.)

More evidence was recovered from the crashsites including passposrts, driver's licenes and Identiy Cards belonging to both the passangers and the hijackers.

Add to that OBL has now confessed five times to being behind it and handpicking the hijackers, and KSM has confessed twice to planning it and training the hijackers. Add to that the martyrdom and training tapes of the hijackers that were released by Al Qaeda. Add to that that Saudi Arabian has comfirmed the identities of the 17 hijackers of Saudi nationality.

The evidence is overwhelming without the DNA.