The FBI obviously didn't trust Sheridan's Nepal alibi and went back for DNA. Sheridan's DNA allegedly did not match the tie DNA hence the FBI ruled out Sheridan.
Unless you can convince the FBI that the tie DNA is not Cooper's you wont have any luck getting them fired up about a lie told about childbirth dates. Sure, lying to the FBI is a crime, but they won't pursue it.
Sail and I are interested in WHY Sheridan might lie, but the FBI couldn't care less. DNA rules their world. They are quite certain that they have a partial sample of DBC's DNA extracted from the tie.
377
Several things: Even Sail says the children were born in Nepal; one in '70, one in 72'. Petey could have been in Nepal the whole time. He may not remember the exact dates of when his kids were born. I sometimes forget when my children were born and I sure can;t keep track of all the grandkids - the women in the family fill that role! Petey may have meant 'I was in Nepal when my kids were born and I attended their births ... so I wasnt even "in" the USA, as a generic statement. His passport records would show his coming and going, in any event. The FBI has access to those records and others that reflect people's travel. So I am not convinced Petey lied. Sail wants him to have lied but Im not sure he did.
We know that Petey communicated with other people during this period. The FBI may have interviewed people to get an idea where Petey was, when.
The FBI would go for dna, in any event, whether they think someone lied or not. The FBI must have some faith in their sample(s). We know there are at least three runs. Probably more. They say they have a partial but we don't know what the nature of that partial is. Or partials. A partial that can "exclude" people usually hovers around 7 common loci identified after three or more runs. If someone tests out at that level that can mean a fairly strong result one can have faith in. Repeats in testing can strengthen the conviction. And that could mean a person does not match on at least three loci, assuming a 7 loci partial out of thirteen using the CODIS-13 loci system. That would be more than enough to exclude somebody and have strong faith in the result.
Would you allow your client to submit a sample if there was any chance he was DBC? Hell no you wouldn't! But Petey cooperated. When push comes to shove Petey always cooperates with The Man.
Of course if the tie sample is not DBC then the chances of Petey being "that guy" is zero!
I think the testing of the tie is a whole "book' in itself and I find that very interesting. If the FBI ever finds the cigarette butts then the DBC story could start anew, all over again. Our role in this matter can only be pure speculation!
Genetic tests are based on very large population studies. Genetic tests use very* large numbers. When someone is "excluded" based on multiple tests, that means they failed to match by a very large statistical probability approaching your chance of winning the $500 billion dollar lottery! This process started with a statistical assessment of the chance that the sample itself was from the hijacker and not someone else. The FBI standard is that these assessments have to be defensible in Court. It is the same standard being used today to eliminate people who have been falsely accused who then must be released from prison.
