ivory
Contributor
Meter Maid
Posts: 75
|
Post by ivory on Sept 17, 2003 19:53:21 GMT
hmm...do you have james paul's aswell up your selve? heh ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Forum Manager on Sept 18, 2003 1:32:15 GMT
|
|
ivory
Contributor
Meter Maid
Posts: 75
|
Post by ivory on Sept 18, 2003 7:59:05 GMT
LongJohn, we just need to wait till that day... the day when it can be proven without a doubt.
|
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Sept 18, 2003 8:06:20 GMT
Friends! Here Faul's "scar" prints! ...animation loading...please wait...    |
|
ivory
Contributor
Meter Maid
Posts: 75
|
Post by ivory on Sept 18, 2003 8:24:38 GMT
...but Faul's prints didn't match James Paul's, so we know his finger print are on record somewhere. Well, at least they were in 1980.
|
|
ivory
Contributor
Meter Maid
Posts: 75
|
Post by ivory on Sept 18, 2003 8:39:14 GMT
Well, that maybe why no1 can find even an article about it now. I can find much information about Faul being arrested in Japan, but nothing to do with fingerprints.
|
|
|
|
Post by MrMustard on Sept 23, 2003 12:11:57 GMT
... i'm afraid that will never happen... we could never get any evidence from the real paul to compare to faul, so it doesn't matter if we get hair or whatever from faul really, because we don't have paul's to compare. and i don't think paul's brother or any relative will ever put themselves in danger letting us do anything with them. If we got, say, a hair from Faul, we could then get his DNA, and it could be kept on file until the day that one of Paul's relatives agrees to give his/her DNA and then a comparison could be made. You say that it would be hard to get Paul's brother or someone like that to give the DNA, and yes, it would be, but in actual fact, the relative doesn't have to be that close at all to be able to make a comparison, as long as they are related to the real Paul in some way or other. Modern genetics is very advanced and I'm sure there would be at least one relative out there who would give their DNA, even if it is only a 3rd cousin or something. Recently I watched a documentary on how they were trying to identify a child who died in some accident waaayyy back in like 1912 - they took her DNA from her bone matter and then compared it with a person from 2002, who they thought might be related to her. They found that the results matched. The reason I told you this story is because it shows that people don't have to be that closely linked to find a conclusive DNA match - as long as they are blood related. The little girl from 1912 was generations apart from the person from 2002, yet they were able to find a match. Now all we need is a piece of Faul's hair and any relative (providing they are blood related) of Paul. Any takers?  |
|
