Adventitious – definition of adventitious by The Free Dictionary
ad·ven·ti·tious (ăd′vĕn-tĭsh′əs, -vən-)
1. Arising from an external cause or factor; not inherent: symmetry that was purely adventitious; adventitious circumstances that contributed to the plan’s success.
a. Of or belonging to a structure that develops in an unusual place: adventitious roots.
b. Originating from an external source, especially as a contaminant: adventitious viruses in a cell culture.
c. Not congenital: adventitious deafness.
In looking at their DNA databases, several states have found false “matches” at 9, 10 and 11 loci, making it unacceptable to have a law enforcement DNA database that only evaluates 13 loci. This was predicted directly into my earpiece by many high ranking law enforcement officials in the mid 1990’s, when it was my job at Harris Corporation in Melbourne, Florida to survey top LEO’s in every state and U.S. territory as well as every Florida county on what features and attributes they wished to see in the new FBI database for Harris’ NCIC 2000 contract. I didn’t have the opportunity to contact the officials after-the-contractual-fact, but I’m sure a lot of them would love to say “I told you so.” It would make my month if some of them had the courage to say so in a comment on this post, especially if they addressed the deceptive words for “complete miss” that is being used to explain the need for at least seven more loci: “adventitious match.”
The original core set of 13 Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) autosomal short tandem repeat (STR) loci were selected in November 1997 and are required by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for upload of DNA profiles to the U.S. national DNA database. As the number of profiles stored in the National DNA Index System (NDIS) continues to increase each year, the likelihood of adventitious matches becomes greater. In 2012 the FBI proposed to expand the number of Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) core loci in the United States from 13 to 20 short tandem repeat (STR) loci to reduce the potential of these types of matches occurring within the dataset, to increase international compatibility for data sharing, and to increase discrimination power in missing persons cases.
I’m trying to help free Jeff Abramowski, who was framed in Brevard County, Florida with false DNA testimony, focusing on the wholly imaginary uniqueness of one (1) loci.
Melbourne, Florida, where I made all those phone calls to high ranking LEO’s on Harris Corporation’s dimes (long before Jeff’s frame-up) just happens to be in Brevard County. Not funny ironic, or funny ha-ha. Just not funny at all.
Jeff saved many lives in his six years with the Coast Guard, and then fell on hard times after a horrible car accident, when he became addicted to pain meds. Hard times didn’t make him hard; he had no criminal history when Brevard decided to frame him for homicide … the actual killers’ DNA was present.
Like Hollywood, the mainstream media is so ga-ga over the FBI that it’s never, ever going to hold the agency’s feet to the fire over its failure to adhere to the mandate to ensure that public corruption doesn’t make fair trials unavailable, even if it means finding “experts” (perhaps licensed by Promega) to shore up the false testimony about DNA at Jeff’s trial. If this weren’t true, Florida Today, Brevard’s hometown newspaper, wouldn’t have blocked me on Twitter. They don’t want me to directly respond to the nonsense they write about Jeff or anyone else who was framed on their turf.
Per capita, Brevard County, Florida is likely our nation’s frame-up capital. If the FBI seeks indictments – per its mandates – for Brevard’s bad officers, prosecutors, state attorney and judges, it could change the face of justice in the U.S., because we don’t need reform as much as we need actual law enforcement.
At present, it isn’t against the law for prosecutors to break the law. It’s been that way since 1976, by U.S. Supreme Court decision. The following year, SCOTUS made matters worse by making it not against the law for prosecutors’ supervisors to break the law. Decision after decision has only made matters worse … in Connick V Thompson in 2011, the US Supreme Court decided that prosecutors and their supervisors needn’t know nor care if what they were doing was lawful. Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dissent rocked, but it didn’t rule, which leaves morally bankrupt Bar associations in charge of holding prosecutors and their supervisors accountable, which they absolutely refuse to do, despite rolling in tax free dollars under the guise of being of equal value to taxpayers and attorneys alike.
Unless the immoral majority of SCOTUS justices suddenly croak and get instantly replaced by ethical people, restoring equal justice swiftly is up to us. The best way to do it is to force the IRS and the Treasury Department to bust Bar associations for their fraudulent claim of being of value to the public. Once those authorities have adhered to their job responsibilities, the FBI and Department of Justice will have little choice but to adhere to their job responsibilities, and ensure the availability of fair trials by investigating and prosecuting every public servant who has participated in a frame-up, or coverup.
There’s no bigger fraud on the public then framing an innocent, and everyone who has played a role in putting the wrong person behind bars should suffer asset forfeiture, and incarceration. The sooner, the better. One witness’ life has already been lost in Jeff Abramowski’s case – Richard Mair’s. Witness Robert Ochala’s is in peril. And Jeff has a family to go home to.
Unreliable evidence? Time to open up DNA databases | New Scientist
The first clue that something might be amiss came in 2005, when limited data was released from the Arizona state database, a small part of CODIS. An analyst who compared every profile with every other profile in the database found that, of 65,493 profiles, 122 pairs of profiles matched at nine out of 13 loci and 20 pairs matched at 10 loci, while one pair matched at 11 loci and one more pair matched at 12 loci. [emphasis added] “It surprised a lot of people,” says signatory Bill Thompson of UCI. “It had been common for experts to testify that a nine-locus match is tantamount to a unique identification.”