Stern was "directed" to submit the baby for the swabbing. He did this and he also had to sign off that he was giving his permission for the baby to be swabbed and for the DNA tests to be ran. He was also photographed and fingerprinted as he was the baby guardian at the time of the swabbing.
Stern's appeal on the DNA test will most likely be denied because he agreed to it and sign off on it.
Stern is now trying to say the method of swabbing is not the "normal" method used in the Bahamas - normally they do blood tests. But I guess he forgot that he signed off on the cheek swabbing of the baby.
Stern is just trying to delay things... I truly believe his appeal will be denied before April 3rd. But still the DNA results will not be unsealed because Baird the DNA expert guy cannot come to the Bahamas on April 3rd.
Sorry...I wasn't thinking when I said "sample'. I sure hope, though, that you are correct in your analysis of the DNA results!
Stern is really un-freaking-believable. Just when you think you've seen it all...he ups his game!
How is interfering with the inquest in the best interest of Daniel or Anna?? If my son died under questionable circumstances and I was no longer here...I would like it if my "commitment ceremony guy" did everything possible to find out why my beloved son was found dead at the age of 20 years. Apparently Anna wanted to know badly enough to hire private medical examiner to determine her son's cause of death.
It could ultimately go all the way to the British Court of Appeal, but can Larry foot that kind of expense? The best option is to get California to suponea the DNA from Ohio and let Stern file an appeal here in California.