Dna -Merged-

[michelle]

How long will it take for the results to come back?

[gaia]

Dr. Lee was on tv earlier today and wouldn't say for sure how long except to vaguely say it shouldn't take too long. He did also say because the dna wasn't complete and possibly a bit degraded, the odds of a match will be less compelling than if the dna was fresh, etc.:cool:

I think the dna has already been compared and they already know he matches. Dna was probably collected from Karr when he was in trouble all those years ago and skipped town in Petaluma. I think they illegally and surreptitiously obtained it and made the match, then decided to go ahead and get this guy - because the Thais were going to cut him loose and kick him out of their country.

[michelle]

I cant wait to hear the results!!

[dragonfly707]

I am so glad that some one posted a DNA thread. I read a news story today that LE gained enterance into a former residence here in Sonoma County after Karr left it. Surely at that time they would have been able to gain some DNA evidence to do a comparison.


Here is the story:

http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060817/NEWS/608170303/1033/NEWS01

Here is a quote:

Karr was arrested April 13, 2001, and charged with five misdemeanor counts of possession of child pornography. A computer seized from Karr's home reportedly contained pornographic images.

"He was brought to our attention by someone else for some concern about other cases," Sheriff's Sgt. Rob Giordano said. "I'm not going to comment about what those cases were."

Dennis Riley of Windsor rented a house on Chetwood Drive in Petaluma to Karr. When he sold the house, Riley told the Denver Post, police contacted him and asked to look through Karr's belongings before the family moved.

"They said he was out living another life" and confiscated a computer from the house, Riley said.

[poco]

Dr. Lee was on tv earlier today and wouldn't say for sure how long except to vaguely say it shouldn't take too long. He did also say because the dna wasn't complete and possibly a bit degraded, the odds of a match will be less compelling than if the dna was fresh, etc.:cool:

I think the dna has already been compared and they already know he matches. Dna was probably collected from Karr when he was in trouble all those years ago and skipped town in Petaluma. I think they illegally and surreptitiously obtained it and made the match, then decided to go ahead and get this guy - because the Thais were going to cut him loose and kick him out of their country.

If they already know, why aren't they coming out and saying it - what's the big deal????

[Shaydie]

I was reading something about presumptive DNA matches may only take a day. Full DNA matches take much longer.

[michelle]

I am sitting on pins and needles here!!!

[Peter Hamilton]

Anniegirl,you couldn't be more wrong--DNA evidence is absolute--I have believed that the Ramseys were guilty from day one,but if Karr's DNA is there,then its case closed and Karr did it--there won't be anybody still believing the Ramsey's are guilty if Karr's DNA shows up--But as for the ransom note...

[Anniegirl]

Anniegirl,you couldn't be more wrong--DNA evidence is absolute--I have believed that the Ramseys were guilty from day one,but if Karr's DNA is there,then its case closed and Karr did it--there won't be anybody still believing the Ramsey's are guilty if Karr's DNA shows up--But as for the ransom note...I ,dunno ,PH- Have you read here much over the years? There's some dead set on Patsy's guilt- not sure they would change their minds; no matter the evidence.:truce:

[gaia]

If they already know, why aren't they coming out and saying it - what's the big deal????
The BIG DEAL is the police might have results but obtained them illegally and NOW must perform the test out in public and legally to PROVE this man is the perp! YOu know, the police did this under the table - so to speak -

I dunno but I'm not feeling very positive he's the killa!!!

If the dna matches and he wasn't home with family at Christmas, then he's probably the killa!!:behindbar

[Camper]

If they already know, why aren't they coming out and saying it - what's the big deal????


--->>>The Colorado DA press conference today, DA stated that all the info they have is sealed. Mouths are taped shut, to ensure a fair trial, and a continuing case that will not be tried in the 'media'.

Can't argue with that, but I may have to take some 'nerve' pills like that old lady on Andy Griffith show, the .10 cent kind.

The DA really impressed me with her manner of explaining things, and keeping mum. Will see won't we?

.

[Warof2010]

I was reading something about presumptive DNA matches may only take a day. Full DNA matches take much longer.Four days, in a rush, as in the Peterson case. They took DNA Monday, and had the results back on Thursday. Remember the famous "Slam Dunk" speech by our infamous CA Attorney General.

[tumble]

Strictly speaking it could be him even if DNA doesn't match.
I don't think it is the killers DNA they got on the panties and the fingernails.

[tybee204]

They would still need to connect him to Boulder and Jon Benet on Christmas 1996.

[tumble]

They would still need to connect him to Boulder and Jon Benet on Christmas 1996.Yupp, and after that he has to provide meaningful answers to alot of questions.
And it seems the few answers he has provided so far doesn't match up too good.

[narlacat]

To be honest, he doesn't look smart enough to have committed this crime.
He doesn't look smart enough to have set the R's up and if it wasn't them, that's exactly what someone did.

[scandi]

I think he's plenty smart, just mentally perverted. His forehead is quite big and well formed which is something people look at for anger or violence problems.

I mentioned before that even though the nail scrapings were comtaminated because they only used one clipper, the first nail they did would be perfect. They could have got good DNA from that.

The TH's today have said if DNA matches that's all she wrote and nothing more will be needed. If it doesn't match then all these other points will become critical.


Scandi

[michelle]

:laugh: To be honest, he doesn't look smart enough to have committed this crime.
.He is so weird looking, very sickly too.

[Vet4Bush]

Looks like he's been a good wife for Bubba in jail.

[Details]

Could be the last 10 years haven't been kind to him - wonder what the kids in Thailand have given him...

[tybee204]

He has been under survielance in Thailand for a while. It seems to me if he were participating in the Child Sex Trade there they would have arrested him for that.

[Camper]

Just had a light bulb go on in my brain, listening to TV etc.

HE had been writing letters to PR before she died. My initial thought was 'did he type em or handwrite them', but the light bulb lit up when they said they would have already gotten his DNA from the envelope flap. SO, I am thinking it has been a match and that was why DA has already arrested him.

The excuses by the TH's parroting LE, for the quick arrest were, 1. He was a flight risk and 2. A danger risk for the small children he was teaching. Hmmm.

I am guessing they have a DNA match.

OOPS edited to add my new brain phart, could he have been acquainted with any of the CA guests at the White's party, that would have let him know about the party and the fact that the Ramseys would be attending it?

Sometimes an innocent comment to a friend or acquaintance can have a BIG rippling effect, ya think?

WAS he the fellow that Barnhill saw walking up to the R house Christmas Day? He is of slight build.

Also saw the psychics sketch of the 'murderer' early on in the case today. TV showed it side by side with Karr, quite an interesting similarity, thin face, nose very close, hair too.

Gave me shudders.

.
.

[michelle]

I am guessing they have a DNA match.

.I pray they do.

[SuperDave]

michelle, we're all anxious.

"He did also say because the dna wasn't complete and possibly a bit degraded, the odds of a match will be less compelling than if the dna was fresh, etc."

Right.

"I ,dunno ,PH- Have you read here much over the years? There's some dead set on Patsy's guilt- not sure they would change their minds; no matter the evidence."

Maybe so, but I will eat my words.

"Strictly speaking it could be him even if DNA doesn't match.
I don't think it is the killers DNA they got on the panties and the fingernails."

Yeah. The forensic scientists think it was just a contaminant. But it doesn't mean he didn't do it. Conversely, it doesn't mean Patsy and/or John didn't either. Let's keep open on this.

[Bev]

had one single item of evidence linking this guy to the crime, she would have said so. When's the last time we heard any DA in a big case like this caution the press that the person they've arrested might be innocent? That would tell any sentient person that the DA doesn't believe in his/her own case. Can you imagine a defense attorney showing that pr stunt in the courtroom and telling the jury that the DA had doubts herself?

[SuperDave]

Bev, you said a mouthfull!

[Warof2010]

It seems that a mitochondrial DNA test would already be complete, and either include, or exclude, John Mark Karr.

[LaMer]

They had ample time to collect a fresh sample from JK, using covert methods. Mark Spray, one of Lacy's investigators was on the scene a week ago.


Excerpt:

The Roswell, Ga., Police Department was credited by Lacy for its role in bringing about Karr's arrest, but officials there declined to say what exactly they did.

"We assisted in locating the suspect in Thailand," Roswell Police Chief Edwin Williams said in a phone interview. "We provided technical expertise to the extent that they (Boulder investigators) asked."

On Aug. 7, Lacy decided the time had come to dispatch one of her investigators, Mark Spray, to Bangkok. He left town on four hours' notice.



http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4926204,00.html

[PagingDrDetect]

Originally Posted by gaia
Dna was probably collected from Karr when he was in trouble all those years ago and skipped town in Petaluma. I think they illegally and surreptitiously obtained it and made the match, then decided to go ahead and get this guy - because the Thais were going to cut him loose and kick him out of their country.If LE already had a DNA profile of Karr, why would they need to obtain another sample from him in Tailand to match it to? If they already had his DNA profile on file, that's all they need, and they could just go ahead and try to match it to whatever DNA evidence from the crime scene they have. The fact that they took a DNA sample from him in Tailand would indicate they they probably don't have his DNA profile already, but if they did, they may have also taken the additional sample in Tailand just to be incredibly thorough.

Illegally obtaining a DNA sample is just not a possibility. The LE would have to have gone through a private DNA testing firm to have an illegally obtained sample tested as the State Bureau of Investigation wouldn't touch it, nor would LE be stupid enough to try. The SBI requires significant chain of custody as well as a judge's order allowing the testing... chain of custody includes how the sample was obtained. A private DNA testing firm is grossly expensive, the LE would have to figure out some way of hiding the payment for their service, and anyone from LE who signed a contract with the private firm and received the bill would put themselves at risk for not only losing their job and entire career but risk criminal prosecution as well. DNA testing just isn't something that can be done furtively in some back room of the police department.

Besides, why would they bother illegally obtaining a DNA sample from Karr in Tailand since they wouldn't be able to use that information to convince a judge or the Taiwanese to arrest or extradite him? LE can't just decide to arrest this guy on their own... probable cause has to be shown to a judge first, and the judge decides if the person can be arrested. They couldn't and certainly wouldn't take illegally obtained DNA evidence to a judge to show probable cause. There is just no reason to illegally obtain DNA from Karr since they can't use it for anything. The Taiwanese would be even more scrupulous in making sure that the DNA was obtained legally as they want to wash their hands of this guy without anyone being able to point fingers at them later.

Surreptuously obtaining a sample of Karr's DNA would be a possibility, and I don't see much reason why they would not be able to go through legal channels to obtain one. All that would be needed is to show the judge that there is probable cause he's the perp and sufficient reason why arresting him before DNA testing was completed without his knowledge would present difficulties (although I don't know what difficulties there would be)... there's probable cause as Karr was already a suspect, and he was previously arrested for child pornography. I'm just not seeing the reason why they couldn't just go ahead and arrest him in Tailand because of the outstanding warrant from skipping the country on the pornography case. However, it may be that convincing Tailand officials to arrest him just on the outstanding warrant may not have been sufficient for the Taiwanese. The U.S. has an extradition treaty with Taiwan, but who knows what sort of information/evidence the Taiwanese may require before allowing Karr to be extradited.

Obtaining a surreptuous DNA sample would also be quite tricky... the sample would have to be known to come from him, and known to be uncontaminated. It may be possible for someone tailing him to cleverly lift a soda bottle he was seen drinking out of or a cigarette butt from a cigarette he smoked, but it would be extremely difficult to do that without that sample becoming contaminated. If someone tailing him watched him drink from a can of soda, Karr threw the can in the trash, and the person tailing him retrieved it from the trash, it would then be contaminated by the contents of whatever else was in the trash. Same thing if someone tailing him lifted a cigarette butt he tossed away.

[PagingDrDetect]

Originally Posted by dragonfly707
I read a news story today that LE gained enterance into a former residence here in Sonoma County after Karr left it. Surely at that time they would have been able to gain some DNA evidence to do a comparison.They may have been able to obtain DNA, but how would they know whose it was? The only way they would know whose DNA sample they intended to test is if they were certain that it came from him. There's probably DNA all over my house from people that aren't me... guests that have been here, the owners, the people that used to live here and their guests... the list is endless. It would also have to be uncontaminated... they would have to know that the sample they tested did not in any way come into contact with anyone else's DNA (and there is just no possibility of that by sampling anything in the house where he used to live).

Originally Posted by Peter Hamilton
Anniegirl,you couldn't be more wrong--DNA evidence is absolute--I have believed that the Ramseys were guilty from day one,but if Karr's DNA is there,then its case closed and Karr did it--there won't be anybody still believing the Ramsey's are guilty if Karr's DNA shows upDNA evidence certainly isn't absolute... after all, OJ never went to jail on DNA evidence. It also isn't absolute if it isn't a positive match or can be reasonably shown to be contaminated. A positive DNA goes a long way in making a perp guilty in a court of law, but it's never an absolute.

Also, if Karr is found to be the murderer, it doesn't clear one or both of the Ramsey's of participating or covering up for him. Obviously, no one is going to bother to investigate if Patsy had anything to do with Karr murdering JBR because Patsy is dead now. However, that wouldn't clear John. Personally, I don't believe the LE will look for a connection of John to the murder unless Karr implicates him. After all these years, they'd be happy to just stick it to Karr and wash their hands of this case.

Originally Posted by Camper
HE had been writing letters to PR before she died. My initial thought was 'did he type em or handwrite them', but the light bulb lit up when they said they would have already gotten his DNA from the envelope flap. SO, I am thinking it has been a match and that was why DA has already arrested him.Do we know for certain the letters he sent to PR were physical letters and not sent to her electronically? As far as I can tell, his correspondence to PR was through email, and it is still not known if that correspondence originated from him. HE says he sent her letters. This doesn't mean he did or that they were physical letters.

Also, physical letters sent for testing for DNA from the envelope would be pointless as by the time they arrived to PR they would have been contaminated... just his putting them in a mailbox would contaminate them. A DNA sample in order to be relevant has to be uncontaminated and known to come from the perp. As an example, if they wanted a DNA sample from me, it would be pointless to test a sample of one of my bathroom towels as plenty of other people's DNA may have gotten on that towel. If they already HAD a positive profile of my DNA, then they could try to match it to a sample found on my bathroom towel.

Originally Posted by gaia
He did also say because the dna wasn't complete and possibly a bit degraded, the odds of a match will be less compelling than if the dna was fresh, etc.If the DNA sample they have from the crime scene evidence is only a partial, they will definitely need some other type of evidence... proof of his presense in the area at the time at least.

Originally Posted by michelle
He is so weird looking, very sickly too.Opium addict. That's the first thing I thought when I saw him.

[Camper]

As I have posted earlier on another thread, IF IF Karr has been sending letters left right and center to PR at least two months ago, his DNA would be on the envelope flaps, right?

SO that being so, IF I am correct, there was ample time to cross match the DNA they had from the crime scene to his DNA on the envelopes.

IF IF they indeed matched, then it is my belief that was WHEN they dispatched LE to Thailand.

Colorado Bureau of Investigation does these tests as well.
So a probable cause court order was most likely issued and the tests done.

Correct me if I have erred.

=======================Edited

I see DrDetect and I posted at the same time. I will revise my thought here on the DNA, perhaps in fact DNA might have been compromised from the envelope flap, BUT fingerprints could have been lifted from the letters, and compared to data bank from his arrest on child porn issues in CA. I am not certain whether a DNA is taken from such an arrest in CA, huh? [b]IF IF so, then the comparison to the crime scene DNA could have been done at least two months ago, huh ?, er?

.

[tri2005]

it is my understanding that the dna from jonbenet is not complete..instead of having 13 markers they have like 8 or 9.

i think if they can match say 8 or 9 ...its more like 1in 100k instead of the 1 in 999 million. (the numbers are made up but you get the point)

if they got his dna from an envelope they can compare it to anything they want.

if they have his permisive dna in the data banks then they need probable cause to test it to a certain crime.

this guy is like the bratz doll boogey man with the overly large head and eye looking makeup.

thanks for the welcome camper.
:twocents:
tri

[Camper]

it is my understanding that the dna from jonbenet is not complete..instead of having 13 markers they have like 8 or 9.

i think if they can match say 8 or 9 ...its more like 1in 100k instead of the 1 in 999 million. (the numbers are made up but you get the point)

if they got his dna from an envelope they can compare it to anything they want.

if they have his permisive dna in the data banks then they need probable cause to test it to a certain crime.

this guy is like the bratz doll boogey man with the overly large head and eye looking makeup.

thanks for the welcome camper.
:twocents:
tri


--->>>WE have been told by experts like Dr. Henry Lee that there are 11 markers in the crime scene dna.

We are also being told that the technology has been greatly improved in the last 10 years.

Probable cause could most likely have been the 'beans' in the 'letters' that Karr was spilling about the crime.

.

[PagingDrDetect]

As a side note, if anyone is interested, this site about DNA testing is very informative, but is a bit difficult to absorb (at least it was for me!)...
http://www.scientific.org/tutorials...iley/riley.html

From that site, this is an interesting bit about partials...

Partial Profiles

Use of "partial profiles" is a newly emerging and fairly disturbing trend. A partial profile is one in which not all of the loci targeted show up in the sample. For example, if 13 loci were targeted, and only 9 could be reported, that would be termed, a partial profile. Failure of all targeted loci to show up demonstrates a serious deficiency in the sample. Normally, all human cells (except red blood cells and cells called "platelets") have all 13 loci. Therefore, a partial profile represents the equivalent of less than a single human cell. This presents some important problems:

1. A partial profile essentially proves that one is operating outside of well-characterized and recommended limits.

2. Contaminating DNA usually presents as a partial profile, although not always. For this reason, the risk that the result is a contaminant is greater than for samples that present as full profiles.

3. A partial profile is at risk of being incomplete and misleading. The partial nature of it proves that DNA molecules have been missed. There is no way of firmly determining what the complete profile would have been, except by seeking other samples that may present a full profile.

Most forensic laboratories will try to obtain full profiles. Unfortunately, in an important case, it may be tempting to use a partial profile, especially if that is all that one has. However, such profiles should be viewed skeptically. Over-interpretation of partial profiles can probably lead to serious mistakes. Such mistakes could include false inclusions and false exclusions, alike. It could be said that, compared to the first PCR-based tests introduced into the courts, use of partial profiles represents a decline in standards. This is because those earlier tests, while less discriminating, had controls (known as "control dots") that helped prevent the use of partial profiles. The earlier tests will be discussed below, primarily for historic reasons, but also because they do still appear on occasion.

Woooo... slogging through all that info makes my brain hurt! :eek: Anyone gotta monster sized aspirin? (Like big enough that I'd need utensils to ingest it?) :D

[SuperDave]

I already took all of the aspirin, doc!

"WE have been told by experts like Dr. Henry Lee that there are 11 markers in the crime scene dna."

It was 10, actually.

"We are also being told that the technology has been greatly improved in the last 10 years."

Right! The DNA itself is not improved, the technology has improved.

"Probable cause could most likely have been the 'beans' in the 'letters' that Karr was spilling about the crime."

Remember: probable cause and beyond reasonable doubt are worlds apart.

Thanks for that info, doc! Some of us have said that for years!

[JBean]

They just outlined the DNA matching. It takes 3 to 4 days.If the cheek swab matches the DNA from the blood on JB's underwear, there is a 1 in 3 TRILLION chance that it would be a mistake.

[Warof2010]

They just outlined the DNA matching. It takes 3 to 4 days.If the cheek swab matches the DNA from the blood on JB's underwear, there is a 1 in 3 TRILLION chance that it would be a mistake.That should just about cover the universe JBean. I was hoping that they would do a mitochondrial DNA to tell us if they were on the right track at least.

[SuperDave]

"They just outlined the DNA matching. It takes 3 to 4 days.If the cheek swab matches the DNA from the blood on JB's underwear, there is a 1 in 3 TRILLION chance that it would be a mistake."

It would be an end-game, wouldn't it? I guess we have to wait.

[PagingDrDetect]

Originally Posted by Camper
I see DrDetect and I posted at the same time. I will revise my thought here on the DNA, perhaps in fact DNA might have been compromised from the envelope flap, BUT fingerprints could have been lifted from the letters, and compared to data bank from his arrest on child porn issues in CA. I am not certain whether a DNA is taken from such an arrest in CA, huh? [b]IF IF so, then the comparison to the crime scene DNA could have been done at least two months ago, huh ?, er?
Funny you should mention fingerprints because I almost included something about that in this thread as well but when I noticed how long-winded I had already gotten, I thought it best I save that for later. So, here's what I'm thinking about fingerprints...

Karr's fingerprints would have been on file since he was arrested on that pornography charge previously. Anyone who gets arrested is fingerprinted. LE may have found a match from fingerprints found at the crime scene, and that may be a big reason why they wanted to nab him in Tailand. However, that was something they should have done years ago, so I just can't account for them suddenly having found a fingerprint match... unless of course, they got lazy about looking into that since they had always been so focused on the Ramsey's.

Also, we still don't know what connection Karr has to the Ramsey's. It's been reported over and over that it was the Ramsey's themselves who gave Karr's identity to LE as a possible suspect, and we also know that at some point in the past LE searched the house where he used to live (although I don't know if that was years ago or more recently). If there was a connection between Karr and the Ramsey's that made it reasonable that he could have been in their house as a guest, finding his fingerprints there may not mean much of anything... unless they were found somewhere significant like close to where the body was found or around the window where he allegedly may have entered the house.

I'm still not seeing any indication that whatever letters he allegedly sent to PR were physical letters rather than electronic ones, or that it is certain it was Karr himself that would have sent any physical letters. If he did send physical letters to PR, would he be so stupid as to let his fingerprints get on them? Apparently, he was very careful of email corresponding with Tracey by going through a server nowhere near his physical location, so would he be so careless as to allow his fingerprints to get on a physical letter?

Apparently, these letters to PR were routed to LE without Karr's knowledge... that would be difficult to do if it was a physical location. Personally, I'm really quite sure that these letters Karr sent to PR were not physical letters but emails. I really wish someone would publically clarify that. BUT, if it was definitely Karr who sent physical letters to PR that LE intercepted, and he was stupid enough to get his fingerprints on them, that would prove... well, it would prove that Karr sent a physical letter to PR that says something we don't know. If he said in the letters that he was the murderer of JBR, then it would be pretty darn good probable cause to go nab him. However, his being a known suspect in the case already and being arrested for child pornography that he fled the country before going to trial should have been probable cause enough.

Actually, it's rather academic at this point since he confessed after being arrested... that's plenty good enough reason to extradite him and collect a big giant wad of his spit for DNA testing.

I don't know whether or not Karr's pornography arrest would have included a DNA sample. Since it was CA (and CA over most any state is generally more stringent about civil rignts protection), I don't think it's terribly likely that Karr's DNA sample would be taken as a matter of course for a pornography charge especially when it was a first offense. I also have doubts that his DNA would be on file for that charge without LE having attempted to match his profile to whatever DNA evidence they have long ago... after all, he was arrested for that charge in 2001 I believe it was. Since he was already a known suspect at that time, why would they have not tried to match his profile to their DNA evidence back then? But it could be that they didn't because of sloppy investigation practices (Lord knows, they botched up this case like crazy for years and years).

This is an interesting article that goes into the need for state laws requiring DNA testing for arrested persons, not just convicted ones for the obvious reason that if LE had access to that information, a suspect who may have committed another crime be more easily and more quickly identified...

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1052440832766
...
"All 50 states have enacted laws to force the collection of DNA samples from inmates convicted of sex crimes."
...
"Proponents of the idea say the identification and arrest of Lee will help persuade lawmakers in other states for the need to start collecting DNA at the time of arrest. Had an "arrestee testing" law been in place 10 years ago, Lee might have been caught quickly. He has a long list of peeping Tom, stalking and battery arrests."
...

According to that article, all 50 states have laws forcing DNA testing of CONVICTED sex criminals, but not ARRESTED sex criminals. As we know, Karr was arrested for the pornography charge, but he skipped the country before he could have been convicted. In this case, it certainly would have been convenient if there was a law in place requiring the collection of DNA from those arrested for sex crimes, not just convicted for them. After reading this article, I have really big doubts that Karr's DNA would have been collected at the time of his pornography arrest.


[quote]Originally Posted by Camper
Thanks for that info, doc! Some of us have said that for years!

My pleasure. Glad you found it worthwhile. :)

[SuperDave]

Doc, I just caught Carlton Smith on O'Reilly. He said that, number one, no reliable source has matched the DNA under her nails to her underwear, and two, we DON'T know even if it was deposited that night! Which is what a lot of investigators said!

[concernedperson]

Mitochrondrial DNA is not a full DNA analysis. That is a hair from the mother or something that could be less than perfect.Full DNA can be established if blood found or semen found on JonBenet than it is slam dunk.

[SuperDave]

CP, no blood or semen was left on her!

[Warof2010]

Mitochrondrial DNA is not a full DNA analysis. That is a hair from the mother or something that could be less than perfect.Full DNA can be established if blood found or semen found on JonBenet than it is slam dunk.Mitochondrial can be completed in one day and would tell them if they were on the right track.--that's what I said

[Warof2010]

CP, no blood or semen was left on her!Au contraire, Super Dave.

[SuperDave]

No, Buzz. The blood left on her was HERS. And everyone agrees there was no semen. I don't know what you're reading.

[HollywoodBound]

They didn't say what it was on her. Just that it contained human genetic material. I believe they did say no semen.

[Camper]

Called my deputy sheriff son tonight and he affirmed that fingerprints would indeed be in the online data base from the CA arrest, but with an arrest on possessing child pornography, a misdemeanor, LE would not have collected DNA from him.

Seems dorky that our LE can collect DNA from convicted sex perpetrators, since they are locked up already, but not from arrested ones.

Seems like we have to get a whole lot smarter before we finally get the proper laws on deck. At the cost of little children and innocents our law makers have fallen asleep at the switch too often.

We are hearing all sorts of sloppy reports on TV etc., but did read somewhere today that John MK's brother Nate had worked for Ramsey, duh, huh, er? True or False?

.

[PagingDrDetect]

Seems dorky that our LE can collect DNA from convicted sex perpetrators, since they are locked up already, but not from arrested ones.

Seems like we have to get a whole lot smarter before we finally get the proper laws on deck. At the cost of little children and innocents our law makers have fallen asleep at the switch too often.I'd have to agree with you on that. I think all 50 states should have laws mandating DNA testing be done upon arrest in sex crime cases, and if the person is then found not guilty, destroy the sample, reports and info from the database. As far as I can tell, the only thing that stops these laws from being enacted is the civil rights element... "what right does LE have to test my DNA if I'm found not guilty at the end of it all?" There are already plenty of circumstances where a defendant's DNA test was forced on them and when they were found not guilty after trial, the sample, reports and info in the database are then destroyed. Why can't they enact laws with that same civil rights safeguard of destroying the info if the person is found not guilty?

This is North Carolina's rules and procedures for the destroying of DNA evidence once a person is found not guilty or charges are dismissed...

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/ByChapter/Chapter_15A.html
§ 15A‑146. Expunction of records when charges are dismissed or there are findings of not guilty.

(b1) Any person entitled to expungement under this section may also apply to the court for an order expunging DNA records when the person's case has been dismissed by the trial court and the person's DNA record or profile has been included in the State DNA Database and the person's DNA sample is stored in the State DNA Databank. A copy of the application for expungement of the DNA record or DNA sample shall be served on the district attorney for the judicial district in which the felony charges were brought not less than 20 days prior to the date of the hearing on the application. If the application for expungement is granted, a certified copy of the trial court's order dismissing the charges shall be attached to an order of expungement. The order of expungement shall include the name and address of the defendant and the defendant's attorney and shall direct the SBI to send a letter documenting expungement as required by subsection (b2) of this section.

(b2) Upon receiving an order of expungement entered pursuant to subsection (b1) of this section, the SBI shall purge the DNA record and all other identifying information from the State DNA Database and the DNA sample stored in the State DNA Databank covered by the order, except that the order shall not apply to other offenses committed by the individual that qualify for inclusion in the State DNA Database and the State DNA Databank. A letter documenting expungement of the DNA record and destruction of the DNA sample shall be sent by the SBI to the defendant and the defendant's attorney at the address specified by the court in the order of expungement.

(c) The Clerk of Superior Court in each county in North Carolina shall, as soon as practicable after each term of court in his county, file with the Administrative Office of the Courts, the names of those persons granted an expungement under the provisions of this section and the Administrative Office of the Courts shall maintain a confidential file containing the names of persons granted such expungement. The information contained in such files shall be disclosed only to judges of the General Court of Justice of North Carolina for the purpose of ascertaining whether any person charged with an offense has been previously granted an expungement. (1979, c. 61; 1985, c. 636, ss. 1‑7; 1991, c. 326, s. 1; 1997‑138, s. 1; 1999‑406, s. 9; 2001‑108, s. 2; 2001‑282, s. 1; 2002‑126, s. 29A.5(c); 2005‑452, s. 1.)

Seems to me they could enact laws that make it manditory for people arrested for sex crimes with these kinds of safeguards worked into them.

Fingerprints are manditory for anyone who is arrested for anything... I'm not seeing what the huge difference would be between fingerprint collection and DNA collection.

[JBean]

snipped for space.

Fingerprints are manditory for anyone who is arrested for anything... I'm not seeing what the huge difference would be between fingerprint collection and DNA collection.Do they fingerprint teachers? My fingerprints are on file from when I got my Real Estate license.

[Warof2010]

Do they fingerprint teachers? My fingerprints are on file from when I got my Real Estate license.Soon they will be able to take DNA from fingerprints so it will be a moot point. A Canadian company had the technology; I don't knoiw if they are still leading the field.

[pinto]

...Apparently, he was very careful of email corresponding with Tracey by going through a server nowhere near his physical location, .....

Hmmm. If he is a crackpot publicity hound who was contacting Tracey to take false credit for the crime, would he have been so careful?

I guess he could have been enjoying the process of stringing Tracey along; when it came down to it, he didn't really want to go to jail. But, when he did get arrested, he decided to confess for the "fun" of it, knowing he wouldn't be convicted?

My head is spinning.

[michelle]

Do they fingerprint teachers? My fingerprints are on file from when I got my Real Estate license.They do fingerprints here in Maryland and a child clearence for abuse ect.

[JBean]

Soon they will be able to take DNA from fingerprints so it will be a moot point. A Canadian company had the technology; I don't knoiw if they are still leading the field. Nobody is getting my DNA from my prints. No sir it's not gonna happen.

[scandi]

I just learned that DNA is a chemical, while watching Forensic files tonight. I never thought of it like that.


Scandi

[Shelayne]

Dr. Henry Lee keeps talking about the blood spot in her underwear that is male DNA. Is he wrong?

[PagingDrDetect]

Originally Posted by pinto
Hmmm. If he is a crackpot publicity hound who was contacting Tracey to take false credit for the crime, would he have been so careful?
Considering that he was on the lam for that porn charge against him, yeah, I think he'd be careful. Depending on what he was saying to Tracey, he could also later be at risk for who knows what criminal charges.

But, this guy is such a nutty fruitcake it's really pretty hard to determine what in the world he's been thinking.

[Camper]

What we need are double data bases.

One for fingerprint and dna on sexual arrests INVOLVING children, where the arrested is found not guilty.

It appears to me on occasion that judges will often turn guys loose because the child does not appear to be too credible, but???

Keep the current data base for arrests and convictions for sexual perps, who LATER are released into society again.

This would create an extra data base TOOL to be used by LE as an aid for them, rather than tying their hands at every turn in trying to solve crimes.



.........
IF IF IF we called sex crimes against children BLUE NILE FLU, everyone would be jumping up and down and wanting HELP, because of the very numbers of incidences!!

.

[Nehemiah]

Dr. Henry Lee keeps talking about the blood spot in her underwear that is male DNA. Is he wrong?

No, that's what he's been saying all along. He's just not saying everything.

[MrsMush99]

Do they fingerprint teachers? My fingerprints are on file from when I got my Real Estate license.

JBean, to the best of my knowledge teachers are fingerprinted at least here in New York they are. I would assume all states fingerprint teachers.

[packerdog]

If he got a drivers lic here in CA he would have been fingerprinted.

[SuperDave]

"Dr. Henry Lee keeps talking about the blood spot in her underwear that is male DNA. Is he wrong?"

No, but there is some confusion there. The blood itself was from JB herself. It mixed with male DNA that was already there.

[T-Rex]

Speaking of DNA...if the Bloomie's bloomers were manufactured in Thailand, can't they checkthe DNA for ethnicity?

[MrsMush99]

Yes, I believe they can. The said the DNA came from a white male.

[Bev]

there are certain mtdna haloptype groupings that can certainly tell you a general region - for example there are @ 7 groupings in Europe and if your ancestors were European, then you are probably descended from one of those groupings. The problem with this particular case, is that mtdna is shared by an extremely large group of people. Now consider this - Lin Wood claims that this particular dna is of a "white male" but many black Americans have no mtdna of African origin. Therefore, it is possible to be of a different ethnic group with similar mtdna to "white males".

While mtdna can exclude people, it is not the precise "fingerprint" that people think it is. Wood claims that this dna was Codis standard, which means that the dna found had to have been nuclear dna which is more precise in identification. Nuclear dna is found by using a method called STR testing. It generally looks at five or six loci or regions of the chromosomes which are highly variable. Codis standard is 13 loci or regions bar coded. Henry Lee has said over and over that this dna is "incomplete" and I think that this is what he's referring to - that it isn't Codis standard as Wood claims. In fact, they may have developed a more complete mtdna profile, while the sample was just too degraded for nuclear dna testing, even with str testing. Sometimes the dna is too fragmented even for today's str testing or it showed only a few regions.

[SuperDave]

"The said the DNA came from a white male."

No, that's what the Ramsey LAWYERS claim! To my knowledge, you still can't tell race from DNA.

[Britt]

Looks like a good place to put a copy of my prior post:

Re the Ramsey claim of the foreign DNA being Caucasian (and therefore not from an Asian factory worker where the underwear were manufactured)...

At Forums For Justice Tricia posted what a professional criminalist told her about the DNA:

Excerpts:
...you can look at the statistics for a regular DNA sample and make a guess for race based on whichever race has the best stats. However, I am a Caucasian mutt with some Native American (Mongoloid) thrown in, yet my stats would suggest that I'm African-American! So while you might get an "indication" of race, it's by no means accurate -- it's basically just an educated guess.

***
But if the DNA is from semen or saliva or blood, then the DNA would only be an accurate indicator of gender, and the race would basically be a big guess.

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6994&page=3&pp=12

SuperDave is right. The Caucasian claim is Ramsey spin.

[rashomon]

"Dr. Henry Lee keeps talking about the blood spot in her underwear that is male DNA. Is he wrong?"

No, but there is some confusion there. The blood itself was from JB herself. It mixed with male DNA that was already there.
SuperDave or others - could you please help me with this: a poster on another forum wrote:
It's important to remember that the same DNA profile was obtained from 2 different blood spots found on Jon Benet's clothing.
Is this true? Were there two different bloodspots from JB with the same foreign DNA in them? Where can I look up info on the DNA issue, for example the info that the male DNA was already there? Thanks in advance for your replies!

[SuperDave]

I think the spots had the same because it was already there in a "scattershot pattern" when she bled into it, rashomon.

www.jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com has a news article about it.

[tumble]

Yes, as if someone has caughed or sneezed at the panties.
As the DNA were much more degraded than JBR's it was probably not deposited at the same time.

[joe jones]

It is only a partial DNA profile, due to the fact that the blood spot in her underwear that revealed the profile was tested in 2003 (I think it was this year) so had degraded somewhat,


so it won't match the usual 13 sites that a full match would,

IMO it will be for the purpose of showing yes he matches this partial profile and then they get the evidence of his being in boulder, hopefully he then speaks to the specifics of the crime, ie did he target Jon Benet or was he just after a little girl that night, how did he get in the home etc,

or the DNA can be used to eliminate him,

either way once the tests are done the DA will know which way to go,

[cricket]

I'm new to following this case, but I thought I had read that the only "print" they found was a partial palm print - not a finger print. If that is true - it would mean that even if the investigators who were following him Thailand got a fingerprint on the sly, they still wouldn't be able to match it. Hope I'm making sense. Does anyone who has been following this case know if there were actual fingerprints at the scene?

Another question I have - were any "private" (Ramsey) investigators in Thailand? If spo, couldn't they have picked up a cup or something else that he drank out of and submitted it for private testing? I don't think it's illegal to pick up something someone else else has tossed (in the trash, etc.). LE might not want to do it, because they couldn't use it, but what would stop a private investigator from doing that?

[Camper]

There has never been a published report of ANY fingerprint being found at the crime scene.

That does not mean that there wasn't a fingerprint found, but LE has never acknowledged one being found.

That would indeed be a lucky thing IF IF LE has an actual fingerprint from the crime scene, and IF IF it matches our Mr. K.

.

[Wudge]

The quality of foreign DNA found on Jon Benet's body has been much discussed over the years.

If DNA tests exclude Karr and the D.A. chooses not to try him based on that finding, we can conclude that the quality of the DNA found at the crime scene was deemed to be very high quality evidence.

If the DNA tests exclude Karr but the D.A. still decides to try him by claiming that the DNA at the crime scene was too weak to be conclusive, yet a jury were to acquit Karr based on the DNA exclusion, then we can reasonably conclude that the jury saw the strength of DNA exclusion to be too significant to find proof beyond a reasonable doubt. And if that were to be a jury's finding for Karr, it is reasonable to conclude that a DNA exclusion would almost assuredly prevent anyone from ever being convicted of the murder.

So the scene is potentially setting up for the true strength of the DNA evidence to be made publically known, and, perhaps, be the sole conviction card forever after.

Remember too that DNA testing excluded the Ramseys.

[tumble]

No how could it be, it is only partial.

It is more degraded than JBR DNA indicating it was deposited at an earlier time.

Remember too that DNA testing excluded the Ramseys.

No it hasn't. If it is the crime you are referring to.

[Warof2010]

No how could it be, it is only partial.

It is more degraded than JBR DNA indicating it was deposited at an earlier time.

Remember too that DNA testing excluded the Ramseys.

No it hasn't. If it is the crime you are referring to.The DNA, from what I understand was good enough to be entered into CODIS--someone said the minimum for that is 10 markers. So it is good enough to convict.

[Wudge]

The DNA, from what I understand was good enough to be entered into CODIS--someone said the minimum for that is 10 markers. So it is good enough to convict.


Yes, but the question is: Is it good enough to prevent people who do not match from being tried or, if tried, convicted? If so, we have an ultimate trump card: Exclusion.

[Warof2010]

No how could it be, it is only partial.

It is more degraded than JBR DNA indicating it was deposited at an earlier time.

Remember too that DNA testing excluded the Ramseys.

No it hasn't. If it is the crime you are referring to.Later developments
In December 2003, forensic investigators extracted enough material from a mixed blood sample found on JonBenét's underwear to establish a DNA profile. The DNA belongs to an unknown male. The DNA was submitted to the FBI's Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), a database containing more than 1.6 million DNA profiles, mainly from convicted felons. The sample has yet to find a match in the database, although it continues to be checked for partial matches on a weekly basis.

Later investigations also discovered that there were more than 100 burglaries in the Ramseys' neighborhood in the months before JonBenét's murder, and that 38 registered sex offenders were living within a two-mile radius of the Ramsey's home.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JonBen%C3%A9t_Ramsey

[cricket]

There has never been a published report of ANY fingerprint being found at the crime scene.

That does not mean that there wasn't a fingerprint found, but LE has never acknowledged one being found.

That would indeed be a lucky thing IF IF LE has an actual fingerprint from the crime scene, and IF IF it matches our Mr. K.

.
thanks camper!

[Lauren]

There will be no DNA ties to this.

[Warof2010]

DNA found at the scene of the crime can be compared with DNA extracted from the blood of suspects. Researchers typically characterize the exact structure of a number of "markers" or regions in DNA that tend to differ greatly among individuals. Colorado Bureau of Investigation researchers target 13 markers when comparing the DNA of suspects and evidence.

In the JonBenet Ramsey case, CBI investigators performed their own analysis, and then sent evidence to Cellmark for additional testing of other markers, Mang said.

http://www.thedailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1997/12/27-2.html

[TexMex]

The DNA, from what I understand was good enough to be entered into CODIS--someone said the minimum for that is 10 markers. So it is good enough to convict.


Hi Buzz

After a murder investigation that went nowhere, the answer to the question, "Who killed JonBenet," is likely in the Denver police department crime lab.

"I believe the technology of today makes it extraordinarily difficult for a killer not to leave his calling card," says police forensic specialist Greg LaBerge, referring to the suspect's complete DNA profile.

He believes he has the DNA for the man he suspects is the killer of JonBenet Ramsey: "It would be very, very helpful to the investigation to have that DNA matched to an individual."

The crime lab has two spots of JonBenet's blood found on the underwear she was wearing the night of the murder. Mixed in with that blood is the DNA of an unknown person. It has taken years to isolate, but forensic scientists in Colorado now have a complete DNA profile of the killer. They know the killer is a male. What they don't know is his name.

Augustin and Gray are convinced that the DNA sample belongs to JonBenet's killer, because of a small amount of matching DNA that also was found under the 6-year-old murder victim's fingernails.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/16/48hours/main661569.shtml

[Warof2010]

Hi Buzz

After a murder investigation that went nowhere, the answer to the question, "Who killed JonBenet," is likely in the Denver police department crime lab.

"I believe the technology of today makes it extraordinarily difficult for a killer not to leave his calling card," says police forensic specialist Greg LaBerge, referring to the suspect's complete DNA profile.

He believes he has the DNA for the man he suspects is the killer of JonBenet Ramsey: "It would be very, very helpful to the investigation to have that DNA matched to an individual."

The crime lab has two spots of JonBenet's blood found on the underwear she was wearing the night of the murder. Mixed in with that blood is the DNA of an unknown person. It has taken years to isolate, but forensic scientists in Colorado now have a complete DNA profile of the killer. They know the killer is a male. What they don't know is his name.

Augustin and Gray are convinced that the DNA sample belongs to JonBenet's killer, because of a small amount of matching DNA that also was found under the 6-year-old murder victim's fingernails.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/16/48hours/main661569.shtmlThanks TexMex, that's good information. It appears that CellMark earned their money on this one.

[Nuisanceposter]

I'm new to following this case, but I thought I had read that the only "print" they found was a partial palm print - not a finger print. If that is true - it would mean that even if the investigators who were following him Thailand got a fingerprint on the sly, they still wouldn't be able to match it. Hope I'm making sense. Does anyone who has been following this case know if there were actual fingerprints at the scene?Palm print (and foot print):

BOULDER, Colo. (AP) — Investigators have concluded that both a palm print and a footprint found in the home of JonBenet Ramsey were actually made by family members, not an intruder as some have suggested, the Rocky Mountain News reported Friday.

Investigators believe the prints found in the basement of the home were not related to the unsolved killing of the 6-year-old beauty queen, whose body was found Dec. 26, 1996.

Investigators have known the answers for some time, the newspaper reported.

A footprint found in mold on the floor of the Ramseys' wine cellar, near where the girl's body was found, was linked by investigators to her then-9-year-old brother, Burke. Burke, now 15, has long since been cleared by authorities.

Investigators also said a long-unidentified palm print on the door leading to the wine cellar is that of Melinda Ramsey, JonBenet's adult half sister, who was in Georgia at the time of the girl's death. The technician who originally ruled her out as the source of the print had made an error, the newspaper said.

http://www.courttv.com/archive/news/2002/0823/benet_ap.html



Info on fingerprints found, and to my knowledge, none of an intruder found:




The fingerprints of Patsy and Burke were found on a bowl on a kitchen table from which JonBenet ate pineapple sometime after she arrived home, according to Det. Thomas, something inconsistent with the statements by John and Patsy that JonBenet was asleep when they arrived at home and never woke up. JonBenet had apparently gotten up during the night (or had never gone to sleep) and, with the help of Patsy and/or Burke (either of whom could reach the bowl stored in a cabinet well above the height JonBenet could reach), was served and ate the last food she consumed before she was killed.


All five of the fingerprints recovered from the pad on which the ransom note was written that did not belong to policemen, according to Det. Thomas, belonged to Patsy.
http://crimemagazine.com/solvingjbr-main.html

[Nuisanceposter]

I have a problem with these Ramsey-hired PIs coming out and saying the fingernail DNA matches the underwear DNA. A lot of people on this board do not believe that the two DNA samples match. The only article that I have ever seen regarding the smaples matching is this 2005 article - is there another report, another article, that also states the same? Did anyone not associated with the Ramseys ever test to see of the DNA matched?

It was also my understanding that the fingernail was contaminated because the coroner's office did not use a sterile set of clippers for each nail. I heard Dr. Cyril Wecht say on telly on Friday that they were only able to obtain DNA from one of JB's nails, and it was of no use due to being so minute and contaminated.

I even made a thread asking about it a while ago.

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41488

[Solace]

I have a problem with these Ramsey-hired PIs coming out and saying the fingernail DNA matches the underwear DNA. A lot of people on this board do not believe that the two DNA samples match. The only article that I have ever seen regarding the smaples matching is this 2005 article - is there another report, another article, that also states the same? Did anyone not associated with the Ramseys ever test to see of the DNA matched?

It was also my understanding that the fingernail was contaminated because the coroner's office did not use a sterile set of clippers for each nail. I heard Dr. Cyril Wecht say on telly on Friday that they were only able to obtain DNA from one of JB's nails, and it was of no use due to being so minute and contaminated.

I even made a thread asking about it a while ago.

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41488
Hi Nuisanceposter,

I agree with you. There is so much bull@#$ going on TV right now, it is very hard to watch it. I saw Ollie Gray and his idiot friend detective on TV last night saying they were waiting for this day because there is so much evidence that the public does not know about, such as the fact that a suitcase was found underneath the window (broken) in the basement and there was glass on top of it.

He forgot to mention that Fleet White moved that suitcase next to the window and he himself picked up shards (sp?) of glass and placed them on the suitcase.

NP, come and visit us at A&E if you have time. Everyone is talking about this now and there is lots of discourse going on. There is a new RAmsey title and I miss reading yours and LIMoms great posts. So please come over.;)

[TexMex]

I have a problem with these Ramsey-hired PIs coming out and saying the fingernail DNA matches the underwear DNA. A lot of people on this board do not believe that the two DNA samples match. The only article that I have ever seen regarding the smaples matching is this 2005 article - is there another report, another article, that also states the same? Did anyone not associated with the Ramseys ever test to see of the DNA matched?

It was also my understanding that the fingernail was contaminated because the coroner's office did not use a sterile set of clippers for each nail. I heard Dr. Cyril Wecht say on telly on Friday that they were only able to obtain DNA from one of JB's nails, and it was of no use due to being so minute and contaminated.

I even made a thread asking about it a while ago.

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41488

Hi poster

They do have a complete profile from the underwear. It does not match the Ramsey's. Why would they lie about that DNA matching what's under the nails?

IMO Wecht is not the best source of info...isn't he under criminal indictment?

[Trino]

Maybe JKarr won't even need to plead insanity...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060820/ap_on_re_us/jonbenet_the_evidence_2

Then there is the DNA of an unknown male found in blood in JonBenet's underpants. Tests in 1997 and 1999 indicated it was from a male who was not a member of the Ramsey family.

Two years ago, Wood said a better-quality DNA profile was worked up but it did not match any samples in an FBI database of convicted violent offenders. At the time, that database included 1.5 million samples.

Celebrity forensic scientist Dr. Henry Lee, who initially participated in the Ramsey case, said even a positive DNA match is not always enough to convict.

"It can never be 100 percent," he said of the analysis which matches samples and donors by statistical probability.

If it turns out that a DNA sample from Karr matches crime-scene DNA, the first salvo from his attorney — whomever that turns out to be — would be against the testing process. As demonstrated by the O.J. Simpson criminal case, even supposedly ironclad genetic test results can be shaken by lapses in testing protocols or procedural breakdowns in handling evidence.

"Whoever represents this guy will whine about the testing that was done, and not being able to do their own testing," Grant said. "It's pretty standard."

There were also DNA traces found under the child's fingernails, but they were degraded and tests were inconclusive, Grant said.

Prosecutors need to find out if Karr truly knows anything about the case that isn't public knowledge, he said. In this sensationalized investigation, he does not think that is possible.

"The whole world knows everything about this case," Grant said. "I'd be surprised if everything I knew (as an investigator) wasn't out in the public domain."

[Details]

....Celebrity forensic scientist Dr. Henry Lee, who initially participated in the Ramsey case, said even a positive DNA match is not always enough to convict.

"It can never be 100 percent," he said of the analysis which matches samples and donors by statistical probability. ...Lee is such an idiot - I think he's been bought by one too many defense attorneys. A 1 in several million chance of the DNA matching anyone else, while not 100%, is so close as to make reasonable doubt ridiculous! I mean, it's higher than eyewitness, even than ideal eyewitness testimony (identification at close range of someone the witness knows well).

And while it might have been nice to use new nail clippers, etc. - if they find a set of DNA in that collection that matches the DNA in the underwear - that's hugely significant, and can't be discounted just because we don't know which nail it came from.

[JBean]

Lee is such an idiot - I think he's been bought by one too many defense attorneys. A 1 in several million chance of the DNA matching anyone else, while not 100%, is so close as to make reasonable doubt ridiculous! I mean, it's higher than eyewitness, even than ideal eyewitness testimony (identification at close range of someone the witness knows well).

And while it might have been nice to use new nail clippers, etc. - if they find a set of DNA in that collection that matches the DNA in the underwear - that's hugely significant, and can't be discounted just because we don't know which nail it came from.He really is a dork. I think on a total match the chance is 1 in 3 TRILLION that is an error.

[Nuisanceposter]

Maybe JKarr won't even need to plead insanity...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060820/ap_on_re_us/jonbenet_the_evidence_2

Then there is the DNA of an unknown male found in blood in JonBenet's underpants. Tests in 1997 and 1999 indicated it was from a male who was not a member of the Ramsey family.

Two years ago, Wood said a better-quality DNA profile was worked up but it did not match any samples in an FBI database of convicted violent offenders. At the time, that database included 1.5 million samples.

Celebrity forensic scientist Dr. Henry Lee, who initially participated in the Ramsey case, said even a positive DNA match is not always enough to convict.

"It can never be 100 percent," he said of the analysis which matches samples and donors by statistical probability.

If it turns out that a DNA sample from Karr matches crime-scene DNA, the first salvo from his attorney — whomever that turns out to be — would be against the testing process. As demonstrated by the O.J. Simpson criminal case, even supposedly ironclad genetic test results can be shaken by lapses in testing protocols or procedural breakdowns in handling evidence.

"Whoever represents this guy will whine about the testing that was done, and not being able to do their own testing," Grant said. "It's pretty standard."

There were also DNA traces found under the child's fingernails, but they were degraded and tests were inconclusive, Grant said.

Prosecutors need to find out if Karr truly knows anything about the case that isn't public knowledge, he said. In this sensationalized investigation, he does not think that is possible.

"The whole world knows everything about this case," Grant said. "I'd be surprised if everything I knew (as an investigator) wasn't out in the public domain."So that refutes the claim that the DNA under the nails was matched to the DNA in the underwear. I figured it doesn't match or we'd have heard more about it than that one CBS article.

Some more info about the DNA here.

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27183&page=1&pp=25

Why would they lie? The RST is famous for releasing tidbits of info that prove to not be based entirely in truth.

[jc9876]

Have any of you ever heard of chimerism? (pronounced Kah mair ism)

A simplified version of this is that fraternal twin fertilized eggs (with different DNA) fuse very early in the pregnancy and form only one person. It sounds weird, but I've seen some documentaries on Discovery channel about this. Two examples were mothers of children who had DNA tests and they were ruled out as the mother. But the father was the father.

In these cases, different tissue within that person can have different DNA. So a person could leave one type of biological sample at a crime scene and give another (like semen vs. hair or blood vs saliva) and get different results even if the sample came from them.

So a perp could be ruled out as a suspect if the sample they provided had the twin DNA.

Here's a wikipedia link to Chimerism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_(genetics)

[SewingDeb]

Have any of you ever heard of chimerism? (pronounced Kah mair ism)

A simplified version of this is that fraternal twin fertilized eggs (with different DNA) fuse very early in the pregnancy and form only one person. It sounds weird, but I've seen some documentaries on Discovery channel about this. Two examples were mothers of children who had DNA tests and they were ruled out as the mother. But the father was the father.

In these cases, different tissue within that person can have different DNA. So a person could leave one type of biological sample at a crime scene and give another (like semen vs. hair or blood vs saliva) and get different results even if the sample came from them.

So a perp could be ruled out as a suspect if the sample they provided had the twin DNA.

Here's a wikipedia link to Chimerism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_(genetics)

I have heard of this. There is a lot about it on the internet and some websites that also have support group type forums.

Also, in our local paper years ago, there was an article about a case where one criminal's saliva DNA was not a match to his semen DNA. I wonder sometimes if some of those released from death row on DNA could have also different DNA depending on which part of the body the DNA is taken from.

[jc9876]

I have heard of this. There is a lot about it on the internet and some websites that also have support group type forums.

Also, in our local paper years ago, there was an article about a case where one criminal's saliva DNA was not a match to his semen DNA. I wonder sometimes if some of those released from death row on DNA could have also different DNA depending on which part of the body the DNA is taken from.That is an extremely scary thought, eh? A killer getting off and smiling all the way home. Ugh!

[tumble]

So that refutes the claim that the DNA under the nails was matched to the DNA in the underwear. I figured it doesn't match or we'd have heard more about it than that one CBS article.

Some more info about the DNA here.

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27183&page=1&pp=25

Why would they lie? The RST is famous for releasing tidbits of info that prove to not be based entirely in truth.I don't think the info about the fingernail DNA is matching the panties DNA is a deliberate lie.
I think it is a deliberate misinterpretation of facts that this match means that it is the killers DNA.

Only 2 markers were secured from the fingernail DNA which means that DNA would match at least 25% of all the population.

Also there are many possibiliteis for the DNA to get both on the panties and the fingernails. We don't know the history of the panties before the crime. JB could have picked up DNA on her fingers and transfered it to the panties or vice versa.

The DNA found in JB's blood on the panties was not as degraded as the foreign DNA found in those same bloodspots, indicating that the foreign DNA was deposited at an earlier time.

[scandi]

I'm wondering if the paint brush handle was broken while inside of her, hence the sliver deposited in the lining of her vaginal wall. And with the snap of that brush another sliver could have found itself under her rapists fingernail, generating a small bit of his blood on her panties as he pulled the brush handle out of her.

Scandi

[tumble]

I'm wondering if the paint brush handle was broken while inside of her, hence the sliver deposited in the lining of her vaginal wall. And with the snap of that brush another sliver could have found itself under her rapists fingernail, generating a small bit of his blood on her panties as he pulled the brush handle out of her.

ScandiThere are many possibilities how the perp could have injured themselves. I think your suggestion is quite far fetched.

We have the autopsy and that is complete as of a ruling in 1997. And no mention of anything more than a small fragment of cellulose in the vagina. So I think you can leave the idea about a 'big' piece of paintbrush inside of her.

And if the perp left blood at the same time as JB the DNA would not be as degraded as it was.

[Details]

And if the perp left blood at the same time as JB the DNA would not be as degraded as it was.I don't know about that - I'd say obviously the perp was much, much, infinitely more degraded than JBR. :p

[rashomon]

I have a question: was the foreign DNA in JB's underpants found only in a bloodspot of JB or also on other, non-bloody parts of her underwear?
For in case the DNA was only found in that bloodspot - just a thought: couldn't this DNA have been transferred to JB from the instrument (paintbrush handle or whatever) with which the vaginal injury had been inflicted?
And old paintbrush maybe, which had been touched by many people before?

[Nuisanceposter]

I don't think the info about the fingernail DNA is matching the panties DNA is a deliberate lie.
I think it is a deliberate misinterpretation of facts that this match means that it is the killers DNA.

Only 2 markers were secured from the fingernail DNA which means that DNA would match at least 25% of all the population.

Also there are many possibiliteis for the DNA to get both on the panties and the fingernails. We don't know the history of the panties before the crime. JB could have picked up DNA on her fingers and transfered it to the panties or vice versa.

The DNA found in JB's blood on the panties was not as degraded as the foreign DNA found in those same bloodspots, indicating that the foreign DNA was deposited at an earlier time.I thought we did know the history of the panties before the crime - weren't they taken fresh and new out of the package, never worn before?

[tumble]

I thought we did know the history of the panties before the crime - weren't they taken fresh and new out of the package, never worn before?I don't think so, I mean the detailed history of the object. She could have been wearing them at the Whites.
She could have been to the toilet at her home wearing those panties Christmas eve.
She could have had DNA on her fingers that was transfered to the panties Christmas eve.

Also included is the history of the object before it was packed ie which factory worker that actually handled them.

[Nuisanceposter]

Oh, okay. I see what you mean.

[rashomon]

I don't think so, I mean the detailed history of the object. She could have been wearing them at the Whites.
She could have been to the toilet at her home wearing those panties Christmas eve.
She could have had DNA on her fingers that was transfered to the panties Christmas eve.

Also included is the history of the object before it was packed ie which factory worker that actually handled them.I think it can be inferred that from Jayelles' 'size 12 panties remodelled' experiment that no way would JonBenet have worn panties that large to the Whites' party.
So (suppose there was no intruder) either the unidentified DNA was from a factory worker (didn't Dr. Lee purchase panties like that and also discovered foreign DNA on them?), or, since it obviously was only in a bloodspot of JB, and not on other unbloody parts of her underwear, it was on the instrument with which the injury to her vagina had be inflicted (an old paintbrush maybe, which many people had handled before?).

[SuperDave]

"(didn't Dr. Lee purchase panties like that and also discovered foreign DNA on them?)"

Yes, he did.

[justice2]

"(didn't Dr. Lee purchase panties like that and also discovered foreign DNA on them?)"

Yes, he did.I heard someone saying that the fingernail DNA and the panties DNA matched. Is this right? Or just more misinformation.

[SuperDave]

No one can say for sure that they match because there are only two markers in the fingernail DNA, justice2. That's just Ram spin.

[justice2]

Only 2! Geeze.

[SuperDave]

Geez is right.

[HollywoodBound]

If the type of underwear she was wearing came from a plastic bag were the rest of the underwear still in the bag? Do they know if PR opened it or was it wiped free of prints?

[tumble]

Only 2! Geeze.On top of that it can even be so that those markers come from a composite of DNA. LE has indicated that the fingernail DNA actually is of little use.

[SuperDave]

"If the type of underwear she was wearing came from a plastic bag were the rest of the underwear still in the bag? Do they know if PR opened it or was it wiped free of prints?"

Patsy said in 2000 that her PIs had the bag and that several pairs were in it.

BUT, last night, those PI's said they didn't KNOW A THING about the underwear! I don't trust them as far as I can throw 'em!

[HollywoodBound]

"If the type of underwear she was wearing came from a plastic bag were the rest of the underwear still in the bag? Do they know if PR opened it or was it wiped free of prints?"

Patsy said in 2000 that her PIs had the bag and that several pairs were in it.

BUT, last night, those PI's said they didn't KNOW A THING about the underwear! I don't trust them as far as I can throw 'em!Wow. Why wouldn't the actual investigators insist on getting the bag from them. Seems like it is a very important piece of evidence.

[southerngirl]

Interesting and informative article on the DNA and what the authorities have and don't have...



http://www.dailycamera.com/bdc/county_news/article/0,1713,BDC_2423_4937937,00.html

[HollywoodBound]

Very interesting article. I guess the foreign DNA mixed in with JBR's blood could actually be from the instrument used to remove the sample from the clothing and under her fingernail.

[Warof2010]

Very interesting article. I guess the foreign DNA mixed in with JBR's blood could actually be from the instrument used to remove the sample from the clothing and under her fingernail.With advances in the collection of DNA, they were much later able to obtain a good sample of the DNA, and it now resides in the CODIS database.

[SuperDave]

"Wow. Why wouldn't the actual investigators insist on getting the bag from them. Seems like it is a very important piece of evidence."

They DID insist! I don't think the Ramseys gave them up!

"Very interesting article. I guess the foreign DNA mixed in with JBR's blood could actually be from the instrument used to remove the sample from the clothing and under her fingernail."

Could be.

[HollywoodBound]

So I guess you're saying when the Ramsey's leave their home because of the crime scene they take the large underwear with them? If they were left the investigators collecting evidence would take them.

[SuperDave]

Maybe, HB. I think it's more likely that by the time the cops got around to it, the PIs had already gotten them.