[Wally_Kalbacken]

They had to have used DNA to identify the remains of Caylee, which means having a DNA sample from Casey Anthony as a comparison. I’m no geneticist, but wouldn’t the presence of a common ancestor (in this case parent) as alleged, be rather obvious in comparing the assay for Casey and Caylee?

In other words, had this been true, it would have been obvious and known and publicized during the prosecution. Baez is either making this up out of thin air to gin book sales, or Casey did, and he is now regurgitating something he knows to be false, just to gin book sales. Either way, ach-patooey on the whole lot of them.

[null and void]

Yep. Caylee would be a 75% match to Casey, not the expected 50%

[null and void]

Yep. Caylee would be a 75% match to Casey, not the expected 50%.

Not that this would stop Casey from thinking otherwise.

[UCANSEE2]

I’m no geneticist, but wouldn’t the presence of a common ancestor (in this case parent) as alleged, be rather obvious in comparing the assay for Casey and Caylee?

From the article: "DNA tests later revealed that George was not the father."

[libertylover]

Baez is either making this up out of thin air to gin book sales

Or maybe the Daily Mail is distorting what Baez wrote in order to gin up newspaper sales.