<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_18_191238</id>
	<title>Killer Convicted, Using Dog DNA Database</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1268939040000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://leelee-phillipsorg/" rel="nofollow">lee1</a> writes <i>"It turns out that the UK has a DNA database &mdash; for dogs. And <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article7067332.ece#cid=OTC-RSS&amp;attr=2015164/">this database was recently used to apprehend a South London gang member</a> who used his dog to catch a 16-year-old rival and hold him while he stabbed him to death. The dog was also accidentally stabbed, and left blood at the scene. The creation of human DNA databases has led to widespread debates on privacy; but what about the collation of DNA from dogs or other animals?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>lee1 writes " It turns out that the UK has a DNA database    for dogs .
And this database was recently used to apprehend a South London gang member who used his dog to catch a 16-year-old rival and hold him while he stabbed him to death .
The dog was also accidentally stabbed , and left blood at the scene .
The creation of human DNA databases has led to widespread debates on privacy ; but what about the collation of DNA from dogs or other animals ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>lee1 writes "It turns out that the UK has a DNA database — for dogs.
And this database was recently used to apprehend a South London gang member who used his dog to catch a 16-year-old rival and hold him while he stabbed him to death.
The dog was also accidentally stabbed, and left blood at the scene.
The creation of human DNA databases has led to widespread debates on privacy; but what about the collation of DNA from dogs or other animals?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31531158</id>
	<title>Re:Privacy nutters, some marketing advice</title>
	<author>Gordonjcp</author>
	<datestamp>1268918400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Learn to pick your cause. A guy who killed a child is NOT a cause for YRO.</i> </p><p>Yes, but it's a post from timmeh -  and you know how much he hates the UK, because we're free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Learn to pick your cause .
A guy who killed a child is NOT a cause for YRO .
Yes , but it 's a post from timmeh - and you know how much he hates the UK , because we 're free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Learn to pick your cause.
A guy who killed a child is NOT a cause for YRO.
Yes, but it's a post from timmeh -  and you know how much he hates the UK, because we're free.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526726</id>
	<title>TFA doesn't mention a dog DNA database...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268943540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've read TFA (weird I know, I'm a new Anonymous Coward here<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) and they followed the blood trail from the crime scene to where the dog and its owner where.  Then they took blood samples.  No mention of any dog DNA database.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've read TFA ( weird I know , I 'm a new Anonymous Coward here ; ) and they followed the blood trail from the crime scene to where the dog and its owner where .
Then they took blood samples .
No mention of any dog DNA database .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've read TFA (weird I know, I'm a new Anonymous Coward here ;) and they followed the blood trail from the crime scene to where the dog and its owner where.
Then they took blood samples.
No mention of any dog DNA database.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526900</id>
	<title>TFA DEFINITELY mentions a dog DNA database...</title>
	<author>The Yuckinator</author>
	<datestamp>1268944080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure what article you read, but the paragraph immediately after the one about the trail of blood - yup - says "dog DNA database".  If you look a little further down they say it again at least 2 more times.</p><blockquote><div><p>During the attack Tyson was accidentally stabbed and police found a 600-yard blood trail leading from the scene. When they arrested Johnson nearby they found he was covered in blood.</p><p>When both blood samples were tested by scientists using a newly set up dog DNA database they confirmed that the blood came from the same animal &ndash; Tyson. The dog was picked up later that night by police at a veterinary hospital.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure what article you read , but the paragraph immediately after the one about the trail of blood - yup - says " dog DNA database " .
If you look a little further down they say it again at least 2 more times.During the attack Tyson was accidentally stabbed and police found a 600-yard blood trail leading from the scene .
When they arrested Johnson nearby they found he was covered in blood.When both blood samples were tested by scientists using a newly set up dog DNA database they confirmed that the blood came from the same animal    Tyson .
The dog was picked up later that night by police at a veterinary hospital .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure what article you read, but the paragraph immediately after the one about the trail of blood - yup - says "dog DNA database".
If you look a little further down they say it again at least 2 more times.During the attack Tyson was accidentally stabbed and police found a 600-yard blood trail leading from the scene.
When they arrested Johnson nearby they found he was covered in blood.When both blood samples were tested by scientists using a newly set up dog DNA database they confirmed that the blood came from the same animal – Tyson.
The dog was picked up later that night by police at a veterinary hospital.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528318</id>
	<title>So here's the question...</title>
	<author>mea37</author>
	<datestamp>1268904840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've seen at least one post asserting that there is no database.  Based on the facts presented in the story, I can see why a scientific mind might be inclined to conclude this: no database would be necessary to do what was done in this case.  I think that's at best inconclusive; let's take a closer look...</p><p>They wanted to link this guy to the crime scene.  They already had him <i>near</i> the crmie scene.  With limited identification from witnesses, that's at best only a start...</p><p>They had blood on him, and the relevant use of DNA technology was in showing that this blood matched the blood from the crime scene.  They could tell there was both human and dog blood; this doesn't require a database.  They could tell that the human DNA on the suspect matched the victim's blood; combined with the other facts, that might be enough to put him at the scene, and it doesn't require a database.  If they needed more evidence, they could tell that the dog blood from both samples came from a single animal; again, there should be no need for a database.</p><p>I'm not sure what identifying the animal from which the dog blood originated adds to that.  ("Wellll, he was covered in the victim's blood and blood from an animal that was at the crime scene, but that doesn't tell us anything...  Oh, wait - he also <i>owned</i> the animal in question?  Well, then!"  If that's the reasoning, I guess the message is "if you're going to use a dog as a weapon, use someone else's dog".)  But even then, no need for a database to match the blood sample to the dog <i>since you have access to the dog you suspect it will match</i>.</p><p>So I don't doubt that a database exists and was used; but I suspect its use and the subsequent publicity have more to do with someone's political agenda (make DNA databases look like useful tools) and less to do with real investigative techniques or real science.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen at least one post asserting that there is no database .
Based on the facts presented in the story , I can see why a scientific mind might be inclined to conclude this : no database would be necessary to do what was done in this case .
I think that 's at best inconclusive ; let 's take a closer look...They wanted to link this guy to the crime scene .
They already had him near the crmie scene .
With limited identification from witnesses , that 's at best only a start...They had blood on him , and the relevant use of DNA technology was in showing that this blood matched the blood from the crime scene .
They could tell there was both human and dog blood ; this does n't require a database .
They could tell that the human DNA on the suspect matched the victim 's blood ; combined with the other facts , that might be enough to put him at the scene , and it does n't require a database .
If they needed more evidence , they could tell that the dog blood from both samples came from a single animal ; again , there should be no need for a database.I 'm not sure what identifying the animal from which the dog blood originated adds to that .
( " Wellll , he was covered in the victim 's blood and blood from an animal that was at the crime scene , but that does n't tell us anything... Oh , wait - he also owned the animal in question ?
Well , then !
" If that 's the reasoning , I guess the message is " if you 're going to use a dog as a weapon , use someone else 's dog " .
) But even then , no need for a database to match the blood sample to the dog since you have access to the dog you suspect it will match.So I do n't doubt that a database exists and was used ; but I suspect its use and the subsequent publicity have more to do with someone 's political agenda ( make DNA databases look like useful tools ) and less to do with real investigative techniques or real science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen at least one post asserting that there is no database.
Based on the facts presented in the story, I can see why a scientific mind might be inclined to conclude this: no database would be necessary to do what was done in this case.
I think that's at best inconclusive; let's take a closer look...They wanted to link this guy to the crime scene.
They already had him near the crmie scene.
With limited identification from witnesses, that's at best only a start...They had blood on him, and the relevant use of DNA technology was in showing that this blood matched the blood from the crime scene.
They could tell there was both human and dog blood; this doesn't require a database.
They could tell that the human DNA on the suspect matched the victim's blood; combined with the other facts, that might be enough to put him at the scene, and it doesn't require a database.
If they needed more evidence, they could tell that the dog blood from both samples came from a single animal; again, there should be no need for a database.I'm not sure what identifying the animal from which the dog blood originated adds to that.
("Wellll, he was covered in the victim's blood and blood from an animal that was at the crime scene, but that doesn't tell us anything...  Oh, wait - he also owned the animal in question?
Well, then!
"  If that's the reasoning, I guess the message is "if you're going to use a dog as a weapon, use someone else's dog".
)  But even then, no need for a database to match the blood sample to the dog since you have access to the dog you suspect it will match.So I don't doubt that a database exists and was used; but I suspect its use and the subsequent publicity have more to do with someone's political agenda (make DNA databases look like useful tools) and less to do with real investigative techniques or real science.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31533974</id>
	<title>Re:Privacy nutters, some marketing advice</title>
	<author>lars\_stefan\_axelsson</author>
	<datestamp>1268993820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I like the German rules for this situation.</p> </div><p>I like the Swedish rule for this situation, where the fire hydrant is actually <em>in</em> the street, below a man hole cover. The only thing at the side of the road is a sign pointing to it (so that I can be found under e.g. snow). If you were to block one by parking <em>over</em> it, then the fire department would be the least of your worries.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like the German rules for this situation .
I like the Swedish rule for this situation , where the fire hydrant is actually in the street , below a man hole cover .
The only thing at the side of the road is a sign pointing to it ( so that I can be found under e.g .
snow ) . If you were to block one by parking over it , then the fire department would be the least of your worries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like the German rules for this situation.
I like the Swedish rule for this situation, where the fire hydrant is actually in the street, below a man hole cover.
The only thing at the side of the road is a sign pointing to it (so that I can be found under e.g.
snow). If you were to block one by parking over it, then the fire department would be the least of your worries.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527044</id>
	<title>Database? Not really</title>
	<author>alanw</author>
	<datestamp>1268944440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a just a clueless journalist misusing the word database.</p><p>This <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/england/london/8567837.stm" title="bbc.co.uk" rel="nofollow">BBC report</a> [bbc.co.uk] doesn't mention the word at all. There is no central registry of dog DNA samples. It's just the first time that DNA matching, between a sample of blood found at the crime scene and a sample taken from the dog belonging to a suspect caught nearby has been used in a UK court.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a just a clueless journalist misusing the word database.This BBC report [ bbc.co.uk ] does n't mention the word at all .
There is no central registry of dog DNA samples .
It 's just the first time that DNA matching , between a sample of blood found at the crime scene and a sample taken from the dog belonging to a suspect caught nearby has been used in a UK court .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a just a clueless journalist misusing the word database.This BBC report [bbc.co.uk] doesn't mention the word at all.
There is no central registry of dog DNA samples.
It's just the first time that DNA matching, between a sample of blood found at the crime scene and a sample taken from the dog belonging to a suspect caught nearby has been used in a UK court.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526798</id>
	<title>Re:TFA doesn't mention a dog DNA database...</title>
	<author>HalifaxRage</author>
	<datestamp>1268943780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>From TFA "When both blood samples were tested by scientists using a newly set up dog DNA database they confirmed that the blood came from the same animal &ndash; Tyson. The dog was picked up later that night by police at a veterinary hospital. "

Way to lose.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA " When both blood samples were tested by scientists using a newly set up dog DNA database they confirmed that the blood came from the same animal    Tyson .
The dog was picked up later that night by police at a veterinary hospital .
" Way to lose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA "When both blood samples were tested by scientists using a newly set up dog DNA database they confirmed that the blood came from the same animal – Tyson.
The dog was picked up later that night by police at a veterinary hospital.
"

Way to lose.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31529870</id>
	<title>Re:Dog? I raise you an oak leaf!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268910780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I recall a similar case from an episode of "The Forensic Detectives" or "The FBI Files" on The Discovery Channel (that is, reconstructions of actual crimes with some names changed but the actual investigators interviewed). In it, a prostitute had been found dead under a palo verde tree. Witnesses could testify that they had seen her enter a pickup truck and the police managed to track down the man whose truck it was but he only confessed to using the prostitute's services that night. However, they spotted a bean from a palo verde tree in the back of the truck (thus in plain sight and no search warrant needed) and then got the idea to try to match that bean with the tree under which the body was found. The police then contacted various universities asking for help with extracting the DNA since their labs were only used to human DNA and as it was said in the episode, the biology professors that eventually assisted, were even excited to be part of a detective story. The bean matched the tree and thus his truck could be placed at the scene of the crime, which resulted in a conviction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recall a similar case from an episode of " The Forensic Detectives " or " The FBI Files " on The Discovery Channel ( that is , reconstructions of actual crimes with some names changed but the actual investigators interviewed ) .
In it , a prostitute had been found dead under a palo verde tree .
Witnesses could testify that they had seen her enter a pickup truck and the police managed to track down the man whose truck it was but he only confessed to using the prostitute 's services that night .
However , they spotted a bean from a palo verde tree in the back of the truck ( thus in plain sight and no search warrant needed ) and then got the idea to try to match that bean with the tree under which the body was found .
The police then contacted various universities asking for help with extracting the DNA since their labs were only used to human DNA and as it was said in the episode , the biology professors that eventually assisted , were even excited to be part of a detective story .
The bean matched the tree and thus his truck could be placed at the scene of the crime , which resulted in a conviction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recall a similar case from an episode of "The Forensic Detectives" or "The FBI Files" on The Discovery Channel (that is, reconstructions of actual crimes with some names changed but the actual investigators interviewed).
In it, a prostitute had been found dead under a palo verde tree.
Witnesses could testify that they had seen her enter a pickup truck and the police managed to track down the man whose truck it was but he only confessed to using the prostitute's services that night.
However, they spotted a bean from a palo verde tree in the back of the truck (thus in plain sight and no search warrant needed) and then got the idea to try to match that bean with the tree under which the body was found.
The police then contacted various universities asking for help with extracting the DNA since their labs were only used to human DNA and as it was said in the episode, the biology professors that eventually assisted, were even excited to be part of a detective story.
The bean matched the tree and thus his truck could be placed at the scene of the crime, which resulted in a conviction.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528568</id>
	<title>Shades of Blade Runner</title>
	<author>GuyFawkes</author>
	<datestamp>1268905680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>not quite there yet, but it's another step along the way...</p><p>still, at least we will have computers that are voice controlled and capable of infinite zoom into a photo.. oh, and hot femmbots</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>not quite there yet , but it 's another step along the way...still , at least we will have computers that are voice controlled and capable of infinite zoom into a photo.. oh , and hot femmbots</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not quite there yet, but it's another step along the way...still, at least we will have computers that are voice controlled and capable of infinite zoom into a photo.. oh, and hot femmbots</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526960</id>
	<title>Privacy nutters, some marketing advice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On the whole, if you are trying to pursuade people that privacy is important, don't use examples like: "If you force me to have a license place on my car, then when I kill your child while I drunk drive for the 100th time, I can be caught and that would be a bad thing".
</p><p>People might not be all that sympatethic.
</p><p>Oh here is another one "I parked my car in front of a fire-hydrant and the firemen had to run around it, delaying them so you burned to death but they scrathed the paint, they should pay me for emotional trauma".
</p><p>Learn to pick your cause. A guy who killed a child is NOT a cause for YRO. If you keep doing stuff like this, you only make yourself an easy target for ridicule.
</p><p>Don't believe me? See how easily the deniers latched on to the "global warming" aspect of "global climate change" and then leap on any cold day as proof it is all a hoax.
</p><p>Samething can happen to people who care about privacy "Oh look, another privacy nutter, who wants criminals to have free reign."
</p><p>Show the voter why he should care about a dog DNA base. Frankly I doubt you can.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On the whole , if you are trying to pursuade people that privacy is important , do n't use examples like : " If you force me to have a license place on my car , then when I kill your child while I drunk drive for the 100th time , I can be caught and that would be a bad thing " .
People might not be all that sympatethic .
Oh here is another one " I parked my car in front of a fire-hydrant and the firemen had to run around it , delaying them so you burned to death but they scrathed the paint , they should pay me for emotional trauma " .
Learn to pick your cause .
A guy who killed a child is NOT a cause for YRO .
If you keep doing stuff like this , you only make yourself an easy target for ridicule .
Do n't believe me ?
See how easily the deniers latched on to the " global warming " aspect of " global climate change " and then leap on any cold day as proof it is all a hoax .
Samething can happen to people who care about privacy " Oh look , another privacy nutter , who wants criminals to have free reign .
" Show the voter why he should care about a dog DNA base .
Frankly I doubt you can .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the whole, if you are trying to pursuade people that privacy is important, don't use examples like: "If you force me to have a license place on my car, then when I kill your child while I drunk drive for the 100th time, I can be caught and that would be a bad thing".
People might not be all that sympatethic.
Oh here is another one "I parked my car in front of a fire-hydrant and the firemen had to run around it, delaying them so you burned to death but they scrathed the paint, they should pay me for emotional trauma".
Learn to pick your cause.
A guy who killed a child is NOT a cause for YRO.
If you keep doing stuff like this, you only make yourself an easy target for ridicule.
Don't believe me?
See how easily the deniers latched on to the "global warming" aspect of "global climate change" and then leap on any cold day as proof it is all a hoax.
Samething can happen to people who care about privacy "Oh look, another privacy nutter, who wants criminals to have free reign.
"
Show the voter why he should care about a dog DNA base.
Frankly I doubt you can.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31529346</id>
	<title>Re:Dog? I raise you an oak leaf!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268908500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Thats not a real story. Thats from an episode of CSI.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thats not a real story .
Thats from an episode of CSI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thats not a real story.
Thats from an episode of CSI.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527252</id>
	<title>Dog? I raise you an oak leaf!</title>
	<author>Wdi</author>
	<datestamp>1268945040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.jurablogs.com/de/wenn-ein-eichenblatt-den-moerder-ueberfuehrt (sorry, no English version, use Google Translation)</p><p>In 2004, a killer was convicted in Germany. The corpse of his wife had been found in a forest, buried beneath an oak tree. He claimed he was innocent and that had never even been in that area.</p><p>Unfortunately for him, a dried leaf of an oak tree was found in the trunk of his car - and DNA analysis proved it was from the very oak tree the corpse was buried under. Plants have DNA, too.</p><p>Oops.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.jurablogs.com/de/wenn-ein-eichenblatt-den-moerder-ueberfuehrt ( sorry , no English version , use Google Translation ) In 2004 , a killer was convicted in Germany .
The corpse of his wife had been found in a forest , buried beneath an oak tree .
He claimed he was innocent and that had never even been in that area.Unfortunately for him , a dried leaf of an oak tree was found in the trunk of his car - and DNA analysis proved it was from the very oak tree the corpse was buried under .
Plants have DNA , too.Oops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.jurablogs.com/de/wenn-ein-eichenblatt-den-moerder-ueberfuehrt (sorry, no English version, use Google Translation)In 2004, a killer was convicted in Germany.
The corpse of his wife had been found in a forest, buried beneath an oak tree.
He claimed he was innocent and that had never even been in that area.Unfortunately for him, a dried leaf of an oak tree was found in the trunk of his car - and DNA analysis proved it was from the very oak tree the corpse was buried under.
Plants have DNA, too.Oops.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31530232</id>
	<title>Re:Orwellian</title>
	<author>VampireByte</author>
	<datestamp>1268912640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many legs does the dog have Winston?</p><p>Four</p><p>And if the Party says it's not four but five then how many?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many legs does the dog have Winston ? FourAnd if the Party says it 's not four but five then how many ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many legs does the dog have Winston?FourAnd if the Party says it's not four but five then how many?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528730</id>
	<title>Re:TFA doesn't mention a dog DNA database...</title>
	<author>Mister Whirly</author>
	<datestamp>1268906280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For someone who claims to Be New Here(TM), you are sure acting like a regular -  not reading TFA, making blatant false statements, claiming to have read TFA (when it is painfully obvious you didn't), etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For someone who claims to Be New Here ( TM ) , you are sure acting like a regular - not reading TFA , making blatant false statements , claiming to have read TFA ( when it is painfully obvious you did n't ) , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For someone who claims to Be New Here(TM), you are sure acting like a regular -  not reading TFA, making blatant false statements, claiming to have read TFA (when it is painfully obvious you didn't), etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31533952</id>
	<title>Re:Privacy nutters, some marketing advice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268993460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You talk about latching on to evocative arguments. In your example it's a child killed, because it's sooooo much worse to kill a child than an adult. Hypocrite?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You talk about latching on to evocative arguments .
In your example it 's a child killed , because it 's sooooo much worse to kill a child than an adult .
Hypocrite ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You talk about latching on to evocative arguments.
In your example it's a child killed, because it's sooooo much worse to kill a child than an adult.
Hypocrite?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31529770</id>
	<title>Re:Dog? I raise you an oak leaf!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268910360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Unfortunately for him, a dried leaf of an oak tree was found in the trunk of his car - and DNA analysis proved it was from the very oak tree the corpse was buried under. Plants have DNA, too.</p></div></blockquote><p>
<i>CSI: Stuttgart</i> <br>
"The DNA matches the dried leaf, Herr Kommissar!"<br>
"Ach soo, we have found... <i>*puts sunglasses*</i>... the roof of the matter."</p><p>
YEEAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately for him , a dried leaf of an oak tree was found in the trunk of his car - and DNA analysis proved it was from the very oak tree the corpse was buried under .
Plants have DNA , too .
CSI : Stuttgart " The DNA matches the dried leaf , Herr Kommissar !
" " Ach soo , we have found... * puts sunglasses * ... the roof of the matter .
" YEEAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately for him, a dried leaf of an oak tree was found in the trunk of his car - and DNA analysis proved it was from the very oak tree the corpse was buried under.
Plants have DNA, too.
CSI: Stuttgart 
"The DNA matches the dried leaf, Herr Kommissar!
"
"Ach soo, we have found... *puts sunglasses*... the roof of the matter.
"
YEEAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528034</id>
	<title>Re:Database? Not really</title>
	<author>lee1</author>
	<datestamp>1268904060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Before accusing the journalist of being clueless, try reading beyond the first few paragraphs.

'Detective Chief Inspector Mick Norman, who led the investigation, told The Times: "It was vitally important that we could put Johnson at the scene of the attack. We did not have excellent ID evidence and using the dog DNA database forensically unequivocally placed Johnson at the scene of the murder."

The new dog DNA database came online just two-months before the murder in April last year, enabling statistical analysis to be given on samples for the first time...'</htmltext>
<tokenext>Before accusing the journalist of being clueless , try reading beyond the first few paragraphs .
'Detective Chief Inspector Mick Norman , who led the investigation , told The Times : " It was vitally important that we could put Johnson at the scene of the attack .
We did not have excellent ID evidence and using the dog DNA database forensically unequivocally placed Johnson at the scene of the murder .
" The new dog DNA database came online just two-months before the murder in April last year , enabling statistical analysis to be given on samples for the first time...'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Before accusing the journalist of being clueless, try reading beyond the first few paragraphs.
'Detective Chief Inspector Mick Norman, who led the investigation, told The Times: "It was vitally important that we could put Johnson at the scene of the attack.
We did not have excellent ID evidence and using the dog DNA database forensically unequivocally placed Johnson at the scene of the murder.
"

The new dog DNA database came online just two-months before the murder in April last year, enabling statistical analysis to be given on samples for the first time...'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528576</id>
	<title>What do I think?</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1268905680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I see a dog objecting to the invasion of his privacy, either in writing or verbally, then they should expunge that dog's DNA records. Until that time, it's fair game. As a side note, how do I go about training my dog to hold people while I stab them to death?</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I see a dog objecting to the invasion of his privacy , either in writing or verbally , then they should expunge that dog 's DNA records .
Until that time , it 's fair game .
As a side note , how do I go about training my dog to hold people while I stab them to death ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I see a dog objecting to the invasion of his privacy, either in writing or verbally, then they should expunge that dog's DNA records.
Until that time, it's fair game.
As a side note, how do I go about training my dog to hold people while I stab them to death?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31530540</id>
	<title>Re:Dog? I raise you an oak leaf!</title>
	<author>rahvin112</author>
	<datestamp>1268914560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oak leaf? Childs play! I'll raise you microscopic algae! Diatoms have been used in more than one case in the US to convict murderers and were even see as a plot line in Dexter! (after being the lead story for an episode of Forensic Files on Court TV)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oak leaf ?
Childs play !
I 'll raise you microscopic algae !
Diatoms have been used in more than one case in the US to convict murderers and were even see as a plot line in Dexter !
( after being the lead story for an episode of Forensic Files on Court TV )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oak leaf?
Childs play!
I'll raise you microscopic algae!
Diatoms have been used in more than one case in the US to convict murderers and were even see as a plot line in Dexter!
(after being the lead story for an episode of Forensic Files on Court TV)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527536</id>
	<title>Re:Privacy nutters, some marketing advice</title>
	<author>gnasher719</author>
	<datestamp>1268945820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Oh here is another one "I parked my car in front of a fire-hydrant and the firemen had to run around it, delaying them so you burned to death but they scrathed the paint, they should pay me for emotional trauma".</p></div><p>I like the German rules for this situation. The firemen don't mind if you park your car in front of a fire-hydrant. They have these heavy fire engines, and it is heavier than your car, so your car will not \_stay\_ in front of the fire-hydrant for more than two seconds if they need access. Same if you block an access way, the fire engine \_will\_ get through undamaged. The same won't be true for your car. And nobody will pay for the damage, including your own fully comprehensive insurance.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh here is another one " I parked my car in front of a fire-hydrant and the firemen had to run around it , delaying them so you burned to death but they scrathed the paint , they should pay me for emotional trauma " .I like the German rules for this situation .
The firemen do n't mind if you park your car in front of a fire-hydrant .
They have these heavy fire engines , and it is heavier than your car , so your car will not \ _stay \ _ in front of the fire-hydrant for more than two seconds if they need access .
Same if you block an access way , the fire engine \ _will \ _ get through undamaged .
The same wo n't be true for your car .
And nobody will pay for the damage , including your own fully comprehensive insurance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Oh here is another one "I parked my car in front of a fire-hydrant and the firemen had to run around it, delaying them so you burned to death but they scrathed the paint, they should pay me for emotional trauma".I like the German rules for this situation.
The firemen don't mind if you park your car in front of a fire-hydrant.
They have these heavy fire engines, and it is heavier than your car, so your car will not \_stay\_ in front of the fire-hydrant for more than two seconds if they need access.
Same if you block an access way, the fire engine \_will\_ get through undamaged.
The same won't be true for your car.
And nobody will pay for the damage, including your own fully comprehensive insurance.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527064</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think this story is very accurate</title>
	<author>bangwhistle</author>
	<datestamp>1268944500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Circumstantial evidence serves a purpose in making a case, and placing him at the scene helps show the "Opportunity" part of Means, Motive and Opportunity.  If we look at the dog as "just" a weapon, than this isn't much different than finding a gun on the scene and using fingerprints to show someone handled it.  Ties the suspect to the scene, though not foolproof  as perhaps he could have handled the gun earlier and had it stolen.  Criminal trials are about using multiple pieces of evidence to build a case.  Rarely does one piece stand alone in providing proof.

That said, the DNA database in this question disturbs me as it could be the proverbial "slippery slope."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Circumstantial evidence serves a purpose in making a case , and placing him at the scene helps show the " Opportunity " part of Means , Motive and Opportunity .
If we look at the dog as " just " a weapon , than this is n't much different than finding a gun on the scene and using fingerprints to show someone handled it .
Ties the suspect to the scene , though not foolproof as perhaps he could have handled the gun earlier and had it stolen .
Criminal trials are about using multiple pieces of evidence to build a case .
Rarely does one piece stand alone in providing proof .
That said , the DNA database in this question disturbs me as it could be the proverbial " slippery slope .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Circumstantial evidence serves a purpose in making a case, and placing him at the scene helps show the "Opportunity" part of Means, Motive and Opportunity.
If we look at the dog as "just" a weapon, than this isn't much different than finding a gun on the scene and using fingerprints to show someone handled it.
Ties the suspect to the scene, though not foolproof  as perhaps he could have handled the gun earlier and had it stolen.
Criminal trials are about using multiple pieces of evidence to build a case.
Rarely does one piece stand alone in providing proof.
That said, the DNA database in this question disturbs me as it could be the proverbial "slippery slope.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526728</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528636</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting...</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1268905920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey, just because MY DOG was there, doesn't mean I was there! The dog... he's still mad about getting his 'nads removed, and he's trying to frame me!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , just because MY DOG was there , does n't mean I was there !
The dog... he 's still mad about getting his 'nads removed , and he 's trying to frame me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, just because MY DOG was there, doesn't mean I was there!
The dog... he's still mad about getting his 'nads removed, and he's trying to frame me!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31529298</id>
	<title>Law and Order: SVU</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1268908260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is that the leg he humped? Have CSI take a swab of it and we'll check the database.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that the leg he humped ?
Have CSI take a swab of it and we 'll check the database .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that the leg he humped?
Have CSI take a swab of it and we'll check the database.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31529406</id>
	<title>Re:Privacy nutters, some marketing advice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268908740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone is a potential criminal, an accident is now criminal, so why dont we just lock everyone up in advance. That way there will be no crime ever again.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone is a potential criminal , an accident is now criminal , so why dont we just lock everyone up in advance .
That way there will be no crime ever again.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone is a potential criminal, an accident is now criminal, so why dont we just lock everyone up in advance.
That way there will be no crime ever again.....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528606</id>
	<title>Let's See</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1268905800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, let's see.  As our guest we have Mr. Sniggles, a very opinionated 7 year old terrier-poodle cross.</p><p>Q: Mr. Sniggles, what do you feel about the collection of your DNA.</p><p>A: Grrrr-rufff!!!</p><p>Q: It's that intrusive, eh?  But don't you feel that in the greater interests of fighting crime, not to mention the very limited rights that pets have, it's hard to object to it?</p><p>A: Ruff ruff ruff!!!!</p><p>Q: I guess I can see where you're coming from.  But that bit about Richard Nixon seems very offtopic.</p><p>A: Grrrrrrrr...</p><p>Q: No, I don't think I'd like a tape recorder stuck up there.  But seriously, Mr. Sniggles.  If we catch the bad guys, surely a sacrifice of some liberties seems a reasonable tradeoff.</p><p>A: Ruff ruff rrrrr.</p><p>Q: Yes, I know what Benjamin Franklin said, but ol' Franklin didn't have to live in a world filled with drug lords, terrorists and pedophiles.</p><p>A: Ruff ruff ruff!</p><p>Q: Clearly we're at an impasse here.  And as you are my dog, I can take your damned DNA any time I damned well please.</p><p>A: Grrrrr....</p><p>Q: What was that about Frederick Douglass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , let 's see .
As our guest we have Mr. Sniggles , a very opinionated 7 year old terrier-poodle cross.Q : Mr. Sniggles , what do you feel about the collection of your DNA.A : Grrrr-rufff ! !
! Q : It 's that intrusive , eh ?
But do n't you feel that in the greater interests of fighting crime , not to mention the very limited rights that pets have , it 's hard to object to it ? A : Ruff ruff ruff ! ! !
! Q : I guess I can see where you 're coming from .
But that bit about Richard Nixon seems very offtopic.A : Grrrrrrrr...Q : No , I do n't think I 'd like a tape recorder stuck up there .
But seriously , Mr. Sniggles. If we catch the bad guys , surely a sacrifice of some liberties seems a reasonable tradeoff.A : Ruff ruff rrrrr.Q : Yes , I know what Benjamin Franklin said , but ol ' Franklin did n't have to live in a world filled with drug lords , terrorists and pedophiles.A : Ruff ruff ruff ! Q : Clearly we 're at an impasse here .
And as you are my dog , I can take your damned DNA any time I damned well please.A : Grrrrr....Q : What was that about Frederick Douglass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, let's see.
As our guest we have Mr. Sniggles, a very opinionated 7 year old terrier-poodle cross.Q: Mr. Sniggles, what do you feel about the collection of your DNA.A: Grrrr-rufff!!
!Q: It's that intrusive, eh?
But don't you feel that in the greater interests of fighting crime, not to mention the very limited rights that pets have, it's hard to object to it?A: Ruff ruff ruff!!!
!Q: I guess I can see where you're coming from.
But that bit about Richard Nixon seems very offtopic.A: Grrrrrrrr...Q: No, I don't think I'd like a tape recorder stuck up there.
But seriously, Mr. Sniggles.  If we catch the bad guys, surely a sacrifice of some liberties seems a reasonable tradeoff.A: Ruff ruff rrrrr.Q: Yes, I know what Benjamin Franklin said, but ol' Franklin didn't have to live in a world filled with drug lords, terrorists and pedophiles.A: Ruff ruff ruff!Q: Clearly we're at an impasse here.
And as you are my dog, I can take your damned DNA any time I damned well please.A: Grrrrr....Q: What was that about Frederick Douglass.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527296</id>
	<title>My cats require privacy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268945220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My cats won't use the litter box until I turn my back to them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My cats wo n't use the litter box until I turn my back to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My cats won't use the litter box until I turn my back to them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31532728</id>
	<title>what?</title>
	<author>jdc18</author>
	<datestamp>1268931540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I dont know why i even bothered to click on this article.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I dont know why i even bothered to click on this article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dont know why i even bothered to click on this article.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526712</id>
	<title>Interesting...</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1268943480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who cares about your DNA when the DNA of something you own and use in a crime can be linked to you?  Forget RFID; the illuminati need to ramp up production on bio tech so that everything is traceable like this.  Then your tinfoil hats  and body gloves will be useless.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares about your DNA when the DNA of something you own and use in a crime can be linked to you ?
Forget RFID ; the illuminati need to ramp up production on bio tech so that everything is traceable like this .
Then your tinfoil hats and body gloves will be useless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who cares about your DNA when the DNA of something you own and use in a crime can be linked to you?
Forget RFID; the illuminati need to ramp up production on bio tech so that everything is traceable like this.
Then your tinfoil hats  and body gloves will be useless.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528266</id>
	<title>e4!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268904720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>your spare ti8e been the best, another folder. 20 Software lawyers members' creative</htmltext>
<tokenext>your spare ti8e been the best , another folder .
20 Software lawyers members ' creative</tokentext>
<sentencetext>your spare ti8e been the best, another folder.
20 Software lawyers members' creative</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526498</id>
	<title>New Insult</title>
	<author>trurl7</author>
	<datestamp>1268942880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>New political insult:</p><p>"He couldn't get elected dog DNA sequencer in this county!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>New political insult : " He could n't get elected dog DNA sequencer in this county !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New political insult:"He couldn't get elected dog DNA sequencer in this county!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31533186</id>
	<title>Re:Dog? I raise you an oak leaf!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268936520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does anyone else think that DNA evidence makes it even *easier* to frame someone for a crime?  I mean, pick up a leaf while you're burying your neighbour's wife, then put it in the trunk of his car.  Take some blood while you're at it; it's probably splashed all over the crime scene where you stabbed her 37 times with a rusty kn... uh, never mind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone else think that DNA evidence makes it even * easier * to frame someone for a crime ?
I mean , pick up a leaf while you 're burying your neighbour 's wife , then put it in the trunk of his car .
Take some blood while you 're at it ; it 's probably splashed all over the crime scene where you stabbed her 37 times with a rusty kn... uh , never mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone else think that DNA evidence makes it even *easier* to frame someone for a crime?
I mean, pick up a leaf while you're burying your neighbour's wife, then put it in the trunk of his car.
Take some blood while you're at it; it's probably splashed all over the crime scene where you stabbed her 37 times with a rusty kn... uh, never mind.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31592820</id>
	<title>Re:Orwellian</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269356580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>THERE ARE FOUR LEGS!!!</p><p>(yeah, this could be either a Nineteen Eighty-Four reference or a Star Trek: The Next Generation reference. You choose.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>THERE ARE FOUR LEGS ! ! !
( yeah , this could be either a Nineteen Eighty-Four reference or a Star Trek : The Next Generation reference .
You choose .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>THERE ARE FOUR LEGS!!!
(yeah, this could be either a Nineteen Eighty-Four reference or a Star Trek: The Next Generation reference.
You choose.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31530232</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31530182</id>
	<title>article doesn't make sense.</title>
	<author>Nyder</author>
	<datestamp>1268912340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>During the attack Tyson was accidentally stabbed and police found a 600-yard blood trail leading from the scene. When they arrested Johnson nearby they found he was covered in blood.</p><p>Detectives said that not only was it the first time a status dog had been used in the course of a killing but it was also the first case of its kind where they could use dog DNA to prove a one in a billion match to Tyson &ndash; and link his owner to the murder scene.</p><p>Detective Chief Inspector Mick Norman, who led the investigation, told The Times: &ldquo;It was vitally important that we could put Johnson at the scene of the attack. We did not have excellent ID evidence and using the dog DNA database forensically unequivocally placed Johnson at the scene of the murder.&rdquo;</p></div><p>So your saying, finding the murder, johnson, covered with the victims blood wasn't enough evidence?   While I'm sure they want an air tight case, really, what else they want, Johnson putting a youtube video of it up?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>During the attack Tyson was accidentally stabbed and police found a 600-yard blood trail leading from the scene .
When they arrested Johnson nearby they found he was covered in blood.Detectives said that not only was it the first time a status dog had been used in the course of a killing but it was also the first case of its kind where they could use dog DNA to prove a one in a billion match to Tyson    and link his owner to the murder scene.Detective Chief Inspector Mick Norman , who led the investigation , told The Times :    It was vitally important that we could put Johnson at the scene of the attack .
We did not have excellent ID evidence and using the dog DNA database forensically unequivocally placed Johnson at the scene of the murder.    So your saying , finding the murder , johnson , covered with the victims blood was n't enough evidence ?
While I 'm sure they want an air tight case , really , what else they want , Johnson putting a youtube video of it up ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>During the attack Tyson was accidentally stabbed and police found a 600-yard blood trail leading from the scene.
When they arrested Johnson nearby they found he was covered in blood.Detectives said that not only was it the first time a status dog had been used in the course of a killing but it was also the first case of its kind where they could use dog DNA to prove a one in a billion match to Tyson – and link his owner to the murder scene.Detective Chief Inspector Mick Norman, who led the investigation, told The Times: “It was vitally important that we could put Johnson at the scene of the attack.
We did not have excellent ID evidence and using the dog DNA database forensically unequivocally placed Johnson at the scene of the murder.”So your saying, finding the murder, johnson, covered with the victims blood wasn't enough evidence?
While I'm sure they want an air tight case, really, what else they want, Johnson putting a youtube video of it up?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526646</id>
	<title>Orwellian</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268943360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't think of anything more Orwellian than claiming that having some number of legs is better than some other number of legs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't think of anything more Orwellian than claiming that having some number of legs is better than some other number of legs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't think of anything more Orwellian than claiming that having some number of legs is better than some other number of legs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528390</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting...</title>
	<author>gknoy</author>
	<datestamp>1268905020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Moreover, I would imagine that US courts would rule that pets and plants do not have an expectation of privacy, and thus could have their DNA harvested pretty much without your knowledge, consent, or even with a warrant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Moreover , I would imagine that US courts would rule that pets and plants do not have an expectation of privacy , and thus could have their DNA harvested pretty much without your knowledge , consent , or even with a warrant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Moreover, I would imagine that US courts would rule that pets and plants do not have an expectation of privacy, and thus could have their DNA harvested pretty much without your knowledge, consent, or even with a warrant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31534132</id>
	<title>Re:I don't think this story is very accurate</title>
	<author>Xest</author>
	<datestamp>1268995980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, it's sensationalist. The dog's DNA was just additional evidence.</p><p>I think the fact that witnesses came forward was probably a more prominent reason as to why the guy got sent down.</p><p>This is what happens when you use the likes of The Times though as a source and don't bother checking any others. The same story, from two different British news publications for example, we have from The Times as in tfa:</p><p>"Killer convicted using dog DNA in legal first"</p><p>Suggesting he was convicted using the dog DNA, and putting the emphasis on that. In contrast, The Guardian:</p><p>"Dog DNA used in conviction for teenager's murderer"</p><p>Which puts more of an emphasis on the fact the DNA was simply used in the conviction.</p><p>Neither story gives much detail on the rest of the trial sadly, but I guess it's because they're both focussing on the dog related part (as dogs are currently the latest think of the children target). Subtle differences in headlines though tell completely different stories. I pointed this out elsewhere the other day- the BBC used a headline along the lines of "Government climate ads exaggerated climate change", when the actual story was that only 2 out of 3 ads were found to be misleading, so a more accurate headline would've been "Majority of climate change ads vindicated" - obviously these two headlines tell completely different stories, yet the former, which gives an inaccurate impression was used.</p><p>It's typical media fact raping. This story is a bit more useful, it mentions the fact there were 3 of boys victim in the same assault, all who survived (and hence, you know, kinda make good witnesses) as well as pointing out other eyewitnesses were around:</p><p><a href="http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23816750-man-guilty-of-teenagers-weapon-dog-murder-in-south-london-park.do" title="thisislondon.co.uk">http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23816750-man-guilty-of-teenagers-weapon-dog-murder-in-south-london-park.do</a> [thisislondon.co.uk]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , it 's sensationalist .
The dog 's DNA was just additional evidence.I think the fact that witnesses came forward was probably a more prominent reason as to why the guy got sent down.This is what happens when you use the likes of The Times though as a source and do n't bother checking any others .
The same story , from two different British news publications for example , we have from The Times as in tfa : " Killer convicted using dog DNA in legal first " Suggesting he was convicted using the dog DNA , and putting the emphasis on that .
In contrast , The Guardian : " Dog DNA used in conviction for teenager 's murderer " Which puts more of an emphasis on the fact the DNA was simply used in the conviction.Neither story gives much detail on the rest of the trial sadly , but I guess it 's because they 're both focussing on the dog related part ( as dogs are currently the latest think of the children target ) .
Subtle differences in headlines though tell completely different stories .
I pointed this out elsewhere the other day- the BBC used a headline along the lines of " Government climate ads exaggerated climate change " , when the actual story was that only 2 out of 3 ads were found to be misleading , so a more accurate headline would 've been " Majority of climate change ads vindicated " - obviously these two headlines tell completely different stories , yet the former , which gives an inaccurate impression was used.It 's typical media fact raping .
This story is a bit more useful , it mentions the fact there were 3 of boys victim in the same assault , all who survived ( and hence , you know , kinda make good witnesses ) as well as pointing out other eyewitnesses were around : http : //www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23816750-man-guilty-of-teenagers-weapon-dog-murder-in-south-london-park.do [ thisislondon.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, it's sensationalist.
The dog's DNA was just additional evidence.I think the fact that witnesses came forward was probably a more prominent reason as to why the guy got sent down.This is what happens when you use the likes of The Times though as a source and don't bother checking any others.
The same story, from two different British news publications for example, we have from The Times as in tfa:"Killer convicted using dog DNA in legal first"Suggesting he was convicted using the dog DNA, and putting the emphasis on that.
In contrast, The Guardian:"Dog DNA used in conviction for teenager's murderer"Which puts more of an emphasis on the fact the DNA was simply used in the conviction.Neither story gives much detail on the rest of the trial sadly, but I guess it's because they're both focussing on the dog related part (as dogs are currently the latest think of the children target).
Subtle differences in headlines though tell completely different stories.
I pointed this out elsewhere the other day- the BBC used a headline along the lines of "Government climate ads exaggerated climate change", when the actual story was that only 2 out of 3 ads were found to be misleading, so a more accurate headline would've been "Majority of climate change ads vindicated" - obviously these two headlines tell completely different stories, yet the former, which gives an inaccurate impression was used.It's typical media fact raping.
This story is a bit more useful, it mentions the fact there were 3 of boys victim in the same assault, all who survived (and hence, you know, kinda make good witnesses) as well as pointing out other eyewitnesses were around:http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23816750-man-guilty-of-teenagers-weapon-dog-murder-in-south-london-park.do [thisislondon.co.uk]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526728</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526728</id>
	<title>I don't think this story is very accurate</title>
	<author>sunking2</author>
	<datestamp>1268943540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I understand British law is a bit different but in the US the blood would merely be circumstantial and wouldn't hold its own. While I do buy that it was part of the evidence that would warrant this guy as a prime suspect, there's no way you can convict on it alone. After all, the fact that the dog was stabbed could just as easily lead one to believe that this guy and his dog were actually trying to intervene in the kid being stabbed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I understand British law is a bit different but in the US the blood would merely be circumstantial and would n't hold its own .
While I do buy that it was part of the evidence that would warrant this guy as a prime suspect , there 's no way you can convict on it alone .
After all , the fact that the dog was stabbed could just as easily lead one to believe that this guy and his dog were actually trying to intervene in the kid being stabbed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I understand British law is a bit different but in the US the blood would merely be circumstantial and wouldn't hold its own.
While I do buy that it was part of the evidence that would warrant this guy as a prime suspect, there's no way you can convict on it alone.
After all, the fact that the dog was stabbed could just as easily lead one to believe that this guy and his dog were actually trying to intervene in the kid being stabbed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31535654</id>
	<title>Re:Dog? I raise you an oak leaf!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269008760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's hope that oak wasn't part of a clonal colony: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clonal\_colony</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's hope that oak was n't part of a clonal colony : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clonal \ _colony</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's hope that oak wasn't part of a clonal colony: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clonal\_colony</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526630</id>
	<title>Masturbating Dog Killer</title>
	<author>MicahEli</author>
	<datestamp>1268943300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The masturbating dog killer is on the loose again!  He'll kill the owner but at least the dogs are happy.  -- Forgetting Sarah Marshall.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>The masturbating dog killer is on the loose again !
He 'll kill the owner but at least the dogs are happy .
-- Forgetting Sarah Marshall .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The masturbating dog killer is on the loose again!
He'll kill the owner but at least the dogs are happy.
-- Forgetting Sarah Marshall.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31530380</id>
	<title>What's that quote from Heavy Rain?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268913480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Something like: "The FBI doesn't keep files on dead cats... not yet." - is that right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Something like : " The FBI does n't keep files on dead cats... not yet .
" - is that right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Something like: "The FBI doesn't keep files on dead cats... not yet.
" - is that right?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526692</id>
	<title>Yes, there are privacy implications</title>
	<author>russotto</author>
	<datestamp>1268943480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any time anyone collects detailed information about a person, his associations, or his possessions, there are privacy implications.  That includes dog DNA databases, VIN databases (and tag number databases even more so), processor serial number databases, etc.</p><p>We're already so far down this slope, though, that nobody really notices it any more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any time anyone collects detailed information about a person , his associations , or his possessions , there are privacy implications .
That includes dog DNA databases , VIN databases ( and tag number databases even more so ) , processor serial number databases , etc.We 're already so far down this slope , though , that nobody really notices it any more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any time anyone collects detailed information about a person, his associations, or his possessions, there are privacy implications.
That includes dog DNA databases, VIN databases (and tag number databases even more so), processor serial number databases, etc.We're already so far down this slope, though, that nobody really notices it any more.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526522</id>
	<title>In Dutch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>In Dutch, there is an expression which is exactly suited for this situation:
<br> <br>
"Dat is nu toch echt van den hond zijn ballen geschraapt."</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Dutch , there is an expression which is exactly suited for this situation : " Dat is nu toch echt van den hond zijn ballen geschraapt .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Dutch, there is an expression which is exactly suited for this situation:
 
"Dat is nu toch echt van den hond zijn ballen geschraapt.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31592820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31530232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31533974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31531158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31529406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527064
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31533952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31530540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31533186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31529870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31534132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31529770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31535654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31529346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527044
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_191238_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_191238.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528318
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_191238.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528636
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_191238.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526630
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_191238.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526692
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_191238.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31531158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527536
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31533974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31529406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31533952
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_191238.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31530232
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31592820
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_191238.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526522
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_191238.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526498
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_191238.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528034
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_191238.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527252
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31529346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31529870
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31533186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31530540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31529770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31535654
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_191238.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526726
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526900
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31528730
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_191238.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31526728
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31534132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_191238.31527064
</commentlist>
</conversation>
