In Chiara Poggi’s OroFargenti’s swab the DNA of a man never identified, “unknown 3”, appears. Yellow reopens on contamination during the autopsy. Asked clarifications from the coroner and new swabs to rescuers and funeral employees
The results of the evidentiary accident arranged in the new investigation on the crime of Garlasco arrived: One of the five samples analyzed by the Oroophery buffer by Chiara Poggi was attributed to an unknown man, renamed “Unknown 3”. Another corresponds to the genetic profile of the medical assistant who performed the autopsy in 2007. The other three remain illegible.
The forensic geneticist Denise Albani, appointed by the investigating judge of Pavia as a consultant for the evidentiary accident, has now asked clarifications to the coroner who made the autopsy, Dr. Dario Ballardini. In particular, Albani wants to understand how the salivary withdrawal was performed, because a non -sterile gauze was used instead of an oral buffer and those who actually found themselves in the autoptic room as well as Ballardini and its assistant.
The need for clarifications arises from the suspicion that the presence of male DNA without identity, found again with the exams replicated on the OroFarningo buffer, can be the result of contamination. As explained by one of the partisan consultants, “it was not an oral swab” that used, but a simple gauze intended for the collection of Chiara’s biological material to be used for comparison with the blood traces found on the crime scene.
Five withdrawals were performed on that gauze: one was compatible with the Ballardini assistant; On the other, the opinions among the consultants remain discordant. According to some experts, the genetic profile obtained is “clear, complete and with 22 markers”; Others, on the other hand, believe that the track shows a mixed profile, where the assistant DNA would overlap that of another person. In the latter hypothesis, the contamination would have occurred due to an error in the manipulation of the gauze, perhaps handled without calipers or adequate protection devices. If this interpretation was correct, the presence of a second man in the scene would be excluded.
To make full clarity, Albani asked to identify and submit anyone to anyone who may have been present in the autopsy room and of which no trace had been held so far. It could be, for example, a university student, or someone who – perhaps without mask – could have contaminated the gauze by sneezing. There are also withdrawals from the funeral workers and the rescuers who intervened immediately after the crimeto definitively exclude every possible external source of contamination.
