Tuesday, March 17, 2009

The Pregnancy, The Questions and The Fallout

Yesterday's publication about Angela Funk's pregnancy and the pursuit of clinical paternity sure stirred things up!
Those who haven't been following the case closely were shocked, some surprised and many left just shaking their heads.
Now, even more of Funks personal business it out there for all to read.
Alot of people have wondered all along how hard it had to be for Randy for live with the knowledge that she was pregnant to another man. Now he knows that the rest of the local world knows it too.
The ripple effect of this tragedy are so widespread.
Wives have learned that their husbands had affairs with Funk, thanks to a knock-knock, out of the blue from investigators on the case. Husbands have found out the same thing about their wives having dalliances with Roseboro.
Some friends who believed they were real, honest parts of the main players lives have learned that they never really knew these two at all.
Some aren't surprised by any of it. Not even a little bit.
Two people were so self-centered and so without personal restraint that they mowed down lives throughout the county. They couldn't put the brakes on.
Roseboro maintains his innocence so any outpourings of remorse are limited.
Funk has no remorse. She has stated that she "didn't do anything wrong". Really?
I'd love to know what formula she used to come up with that assessment.

So now, a continuance was granted thanks to a petition of the court by Mr. Sodomsky. This case will now drag out even longer. It's the middle of March. The trial was set for July 6, 2009. What on earth do they have on the list now that would require pushing the trial date even further back?
What has changed?
Jan Roseboro is still gone. Funk will deliver on April 1, 2009 give or take two weeks. Do they really believe that there is more exonerating evidence out there to find?
Why did Funk's attorney petition the court to delay the serology?
He wanted it postponed until after delivery, which makes no sense if the testing was not in utero.
It's the paternity that's at issue.
And for that, the child needs to be tested.
Interesting.......See what the professionals have to say:
  1. Can a paternity test be performed without the mother?

  2. Yes. If the mother's participation is not possible, we can perform a motherless paternity test at no additional charge. A motherless test requires more extensive analysis to produce conclusive results, but the results are just as accurate as those of a standard paternity test.

    DDC encourages mothers to participate in paternity testing for the following reasons:

    Mothers who participate are guaranteed to receive a copy of the test results. Due to DDC's strict confidentiality policy, we are only able to release results to those tested, their authorized representatives (such as an attorney), or the tested child's legal custodian.
    Some courts require the mother to participate in a paternity test.
    The mother's participation aids in the analysis of unexpected results. Her participation is especially helpful in the rare cases when a mutation (a random change in the DNA) has affected the results.

The LNP articles never hinted that the testing was in utero, of the unborn child. So what results were they referring to in printing that the results in question weren't available or part of the record?
A simple swab from the inside of the cheek is all that is needed for DNA testing in most cases, if not all. That could be done once the child is born.
In utero testing is contraindicated in cases where the mother is more than 24 weeks along.


Here is the pre-birth scenario:
  1. Can you do a paternity test before the baby is born?

  2. Yes. If the mother is between 10 and 24 weeks pregnant, an OB-GYN can collect a DNA sample from the developing child through either chorionic villi sampling (10-13 weeks) or amniocentesis (14-24 weeks). The baby's prenatal sample is then compared against the mother's and alleged father's DNA samples, which are collected using the standard buccal swabbing method.

    If the mother is more than 24 weeks pregnant, she must wait until the baby is born to do a paternity test. However, a newborn infant can be swabbed any time following birth, so a paternity test can be started soon after the delivery.

So it looks like Funk's blood sample was just taken for even more clarity in case of mutation of genes.....
  1. Can a paternity test be performed without the mother?

  2. Yes. If the mother's participation is not possible, we can perform a motherless paternity test at no additional charge. A motherless test requires more extensive analysis to produce conclusive results, but the results are just as accurate as those of a standard paternity test.

    DDC encourages mothers to participate in paternity testing for the following reasons:

    Mothers who participate are guaranteed to receive a copy of the test results. Due to DDC's strict confidentiality policy, we are only able to release results to those tested, their authorized representatives (such as an attorney), or the tested child's legal custodian.
    Some courts require the mother to participate in a paternity test.
    The mother's participation aids in the analysis of unexpected results. Her participation is especially helpful in the rare cases when a mutation (a random change in the DNA) has affected the results.

So there will be no results until after the birth of the baby, if everyone has followed the accepted protocol.

I am sure Mr. Sodomsky is well versed on all of this by now so perhaps he planned all along to file for the continuance. Having blood samples taken at this time yields no results and would have no impact whatsoever until after the delivery. That leads me to believe he wanted the delay anyway, and planned on it prior to this latest chain of events.


The only thing left to surprise anyone would be for those test results to reveal that Roseboro is NOT the father of the baby. Could it happen? Yep. Nothing about Funk should surprise anyone anymore. But odds are, it's Roseboro's. Funk had him in her sights. And the baby just sealed the deal.

0 comments: