Fingernail Scrapings and Trace Evidence Science

[Markus Aurelius Franzoi]

So the prosecution medical team said they found traces of small intestinal matter in Ali’s nail clippings or scrapings. Either they were right or they were wrong or misled by misinterpretation, or by evidence planting or contamination.

Do we believe what they say outright or not, and why or why not? Is it just trusting professionals and scientists or do we add our own understanding of fingernail trace evidence and beliefs about dirty fingernails in general?

If it’s based on our own knowledge or beliefs, it should be noted that there’s a difference between trace evidence under the fingernails of a dead person versus a living one with regard to decay etc. There are also myths about dirty fingernails in general.

Here’s a link to start us off but I won’t quote it yet.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33587179/

[Howard Brown]

You forgot to mention that the defense experts assented that whatever Flint and Formad found was there.

[Markus Aurelius Franzoi]

Didn’t they use the misinterpretation defence?

I no longer entertain that myself.

[Howard Brown]

Mark:

Yes they did.
It's one aspect of the case that I never found cause to doubt. If the defense team didn't, then why should anyone else.

These two East River Echos are about Drs. Herold and Mott, both defense team medicos.
Herold affirms the findings of Flint & Formad......and Mott is claimed to have stated he assisted in the tests which sent Ali to prison.

[Markus Aurelius Franzoi]

So they didn’t question it. They just tried to find another possible explanation such as the one Ali tried to use on the stand about being with a menstruating woman. Presumably the defence approved that defence. Am I thinking correctly?

Let me correct myself. I still believe the misinterpretation theory in a sense. It’s the old His tissues show he was raised on a diet of corn; that means he was raised in the corn belt! Yeah. He has a Bible. He must be from the Bible Belt!

Science most times can only suggest possibilities.

The finding shouldn’t have been fatal to the defence with an open door and blood etc. in the hall. Should it? Even if it proved he entered the crime scene. I can see why the defence didn’t challenge if that’s what happened.

Obviously, they had no key and/or they had the alleged push button lock so they couldn’t ask how he could possibly have gotten in. He could have had the key at that point or buttons as the case may be.

[Markus Aurelius Franzoi]

You asked anyone to defend Ali. I went with the Locked Door Mystery when I was iffy about it. But I convinced myself if not anyone else that this was a real Locked Door Mystery and so one has to look at the science that says Ali got in the room if not did the murder. I’m trying not to use any Orangutang analogies.

[Howard Brown]

Mark:

The defense argued that he had the blood on his shirt from an encounter with a menstruating Alice Sullivan....not a random, nameless, woman from the area. When Sullivan denied she was and Harrington confirmed she showed no signs of having her period by the absence of blood stains on her bedsheets, the jury went with the women. Had Ali not been specific as to who was supposed to be on their period, who knows if he'd have been believed or not ? There would have been no one to deny not having their period.

The defense argued Ali was not in the room on the night in question. Understandable since they're trying to keep him from a date in the electric chair.
The prosecution argued he was in the room, using the blood evidence, as well as other circumstantial factors. Therefore, he was the killer.
Actually, both could have been wrong.
There's no proof that C. Kniclo locked the door upon his departure. Ali, unlike C. Kniclo, had been in the fifth floor rooms numerous times and would know how to lock the door without the key.
In this scenario : Ali, contrary to the defense's contention, had been in the room. Ali, contrary to the prosecution's claim, did not kill her.... he only came into contact with her corpse.
To me, this is what happened. It satisfies the defense's position he was innocent of murder and it satisfies the prosecution's position to some degree that he was in the room and was in contact with her person..

The defense can't be right in saying he had no contact with her. One of the four medical men utilized by the defense ( Herold ) even refers to the Flint/Formad finds in a book he himself wrote.
No mention of the type of door has been found in my scouring of the papers, inquest transcript, or trial testimony. That's not to say I didn't overlook one.
There may be a reason for this. If a criminal case involves referring to a door mechanism in 2022, it may be necessary to designate which type of lock or locking devices it has. Card locks, heat sensor locks, simple Yale key locks, etc....all may play a factor in the outcome of a criminal case.

In 1891, I believe it was unnecessary for an explanation to be given as it was a given that they had those types of locks on the side panels. Meaning, why explain or point out the obvious ? They used corn cobs out in the Bible Belt to wipe themselves but you won't find many references to this.
So, the prosecution didn't have to explain how Ali could have gone in ( door was unlocked in their theory) and how Ali locked it ( via button lock).

The defense were obviously and rightfully interested in what happened to C. Kniclo as he had the key. No problem there. I'd have done that too.
But his possession of the key was in relation to him being the last man in the room....having the key....and not in how Ali could have locked the door as they, like the prosecution and everyone else
involved would know that the button lock would work irrespective of him having the key, The defense never argued that C. Kniclo took the only means in which anyone could leave the room and lock the door behind them. I doubt if anyone actually considered that the killer, whether Ali or C. Kniclo, kept the key very long after the murder. Would you ? I think it's astonishing that C. Kniclo, if the story is true, kept the key beyond 100 yards of the hotel before ditching it down a culvert or putting it somewhere it couldn't be found.

By the way, in one of the Echos I put up last night, Justin Herold was 34, not 24, before he became the youngest elected coroner in NYC history up until that time. My goof.

[Howard Brown]

Without trying to convolute matters any further.....the prosecution may have believed that C. Kniclo left the key inside Room 31 in the first place and with the door unlocked . Ali, in this theory, goes into the unlocked room, kills Brown, and leaves, taking the key left by C. Kniclo, locking the door....and over the next 20 hours up until his arrest on Water Street....ditched the key.

We have the luxury ( actually since 1901, publicly ) of knowing this was incorrect. At the time of the trial, it was still a viable option.

The key & its importance took a ten-year nap until brought back to life by Damon,

[Markus Aurelius Franzoi]

Without trying to convolute matters any further.....the prosecution may have believed that C. Kniclo left the key inside Room 31 in the first place and with the door unlocked . Ali, in this theory, goes into the unlocked room, kills Brown, and leaves, taking the key left by C. Kniclo, locking the door....and over the next 20 hours up until his arrest on Water Street....ditched the key….,

I’m sure that’s exactly what they thought if there were no push buttons on the lock. We can leave the door wide open. I never believed in a real locked door mystery before.

It doesn’t matter with regard to whether the science bears scrutiny and/or can stand up to it, or whether it’s at least worth researching and studying just for the sake of education.

Weren’t the nail scrapings taken 48 hours after the murder? I have 48 hours as the limit for DNA under the fingernails of a dead victim. I’ll admit that higher standards don’t always prove invalid evidence or innocence or that the evidence should be dismissed at best or considered planted at worst.

But contrary to some belief, nails do not store the residue of everything you touch, certainly not for 48 hours on a living person, according to published study.

[Kattrup]

Without trying to convolute matters any further.....the prosecution may have believed that C. Kniclo left the key inside Room 31 in the first place and with the door unlocked . Ali, in this theory, goes into the unlocked room, kills Brown, and leaves, taking the key left by C. Kniclo, locking the door....and over the next 20 hours up until his arrest on Water Street....ditched the key.

We have the luxury ( actually since 1901, publicly ) of knowing this was incorrect. At the time of the trial, it was still a viable option.

The key & its importance took a ten-year nap until brought back to life by Damon,

Sorry for asking this, Howard, but I cannot remember if it was established that there was no other key to the room?

For instance, the hotel could have had an extra set or a skeleton key.

I'm assuming there was no other key, but cannot recall whether the police or others established this, or they just assumed?

[Howard Brown]

Hi Kattrup

The room was opened with a key on the morning of the 24th. Either it was a master key or a duplicate key but, as the story goes, not the one issued by Miniter to the two on the night of the 23rd.
Your guess is as good as mine as to whether it was a master or duplicate that was used to open Room 31.

[Howard Brown]

Weren’t the nail scrapings taken 48 hours after the murder? I have 48 hours as the limit for DNA under the fingernails of a dead victim. I’ll admit that higher standards don’t always prove invalid evidence or innocence or that the evidence should be dismissed at best or considered planted at worst.
-Mark-

Mark....it was more than 48 hours when the scraping were taken.

[Howard Brown]

Mark:
Sorry for leaving this off the previous post

4 pages on Frink and the fingernail evidence. It was on the 27th ( three full days after the murder ) that Frink took material from under Ali's nails.

[Kattrup]

Hi Kattrup

The room was opened with a key on the morning of the 24th. Either it was a master key or a duplicate key but, as the story goes, not the one issued by Miniter to the two on the night of the 23rd.
Your guess is as good as mine as to whether it was a master or duplicate that was used to open Room 31.

Thanks - how silly of me, of course the there must have been a secondary key in order to open the room. I didn't think about that (looks for the slap-to-forehead icon)

So, one wonders if the police checked how many keys in existence might open or lock the door. Seems like an important thing to establish, one would think.

[Howard Brown]

Katt:

I don't think it was a silly question, boss. It's a team effort and every question is valuable. Keep bringing them up when possible.

The hotel would have to have an extra key or the master. It didn't spend much on items from the looks of it. I doubt that the keys issued by the hotel would fit other hotel rooms....in other words, a general purpose key. That thought occurred to me before.

Back to Mark's commentary on the type of door.

There is something we've yet to figure out in all of this nail/evidence and type of door discussion. I don't know what it is at this time. ( By the way, Nina is in your corner, Mark, about the need for us to determine if it was a button lock door and Ali could lock it later on had C. Kniclo left it open. You missed a barnburner on our ride home. I got my gonads scorched.)

1. If C. Kniclo locks the door with the key, how does Ali get in ?
Possible answer : Brown lets him in and he kills her. He certainly wouldn't burglarize the room with her alive. He'd have the junk under his nails in either circumstance.
2. If C. Kniclo doesn't lock the door, Ali can get in easily.
Possible result : He murders Brown
Possible result : He only burgles the room. C. Kniclo killed her earlier.

Nina suggests ( and strongly) that it makes no sense that the hotel would have the type of door locks that should a tenant unintentionally lock themselves out, it would require hotel personnel to go up four flights of stairs just to unlock it for some drunken dunce. I have to agree with that line of thinking....unless the number of times this happened was minimal and were rare occurrences.

If the key was left in Room 31 by C. Kniclo.....then Damon's story is complete bullshit. Ali would have taken the key and locked it on his way out....and ditched it. It was not present in the hotel.

One thing that comes to mind ( mine, that is) is in regard to whatever happened with the key to Ali's room ( Number 33 ) ? I have yet to see anything which lets us know if he left in room 33 or not.
Since no mention of him being in possession of that key ( by the police & press) seems to exist, then I wonder if it was left in Room 33 or did he ditch it.
Ali avoided the front desk on his way out when he (according to Fitzgerald ) 'sneaked' out....so we know he didn't leave the key to room 33 or any key at the front desk.