Why? Because of foreign dna? That dna from saliva which contains skin cells could've been left on a cloth napkin by one of the Ramseys' male guests who was at their Xmas party on 23 Dec. That dna could've gotten to where it was found via secondary transfer.
i am asking again.....
how would anyone’s saliva, other than an assailant, be found INSIDE the panties of a 5 year old child...panties she was still wearing?
how many people do you let put their napkins, hands, down the pants of your child?
the difference between “touch” DNA as would be described in collecting evidence from the ransom note, or the garot....is NOT the same DNA that was recovered from INSIDE that child’s underwear! That wasn’t touch DNA; it was a bodily fluid sample, a sample that generated, as was stated in numerous programs a FULL DNA profile. DNA that DID NOT match ANY Ramsey family member.
also, as I said previously....the “bodily fluids” sample has NOT been identified as saliva, saliva alone, semen, semen alone, or a mixture...it is identified as bodily fluids and “foreign DNA, NOT related to ANY Ramsey family member”.
also, the ideas about JBR being a victim of repeated sexual assaults....the autopsy of the child notes an INTACT hymen; meaning she had not been a victim of any prior penetrating sexual intercourse.
again, as hard as the Bolder PD tried to hang this on the Ramsey family: if there were evidence of prior sexual abuse; and if the bodily fluids in her underwear had been DNA matched to JR or PR....they would have buried both of them UNDER the jail.
there was also no mention by any previous interviews of law enforcement, grand jurors, or documents that mention ANY evidence of prior, or ongoing sexual abuse of that child.
I just don’t understand why people continue to imply that this is a motive.