candy
Inactive
Catherine Crier, "Crier Live", Court TV, January 7, 2004
Catherine Crier: CC
Dr. Larry Kobilinsky: LK
Larry Pozner: LP
Catherine Crier: Will new evidence in the JonBenet Ramsey case close the umbrella of suspicion on her parents for good? Well investigate.
CC: Hello everybody. Catherine Crier here with tonights first look at todays hot legal stories. And heres something fascinating. Big news in the JonBenet Ramsey investigation. Could a long ignored forensic clue finally point the finger at her killer? The seven year old murder mystery recently took on a new life after DNA evidence was turned over to the FBI for investigation. So what took Boulder Police so long? Tonights thirteenth juror question asks if you think The Boulder Police ignored other leads by just focusing on the Ramseys?
Now with me, forensic scientist Dr. Larry Kobilinsky, hes an associate provost with the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, and in Denver, criminal defense attorney Larry Posner, who has been following the Ramsey investigation closely throughout the years and by phone for People Magazine, correspondent Gail Westcott, who wrote about the new evidence in this weeks issue. So Gail, let me start with you, its not brand new in terms of the cops knowing about it, but its certainly new in term of the public.
Gail Westcott, People Magazine: Well, it turns out that there were two spots of blood found in JonBenets underwear. And the first was much publicized and tested in 1997. And it did contain male DNA, not related to the Ramseys, but evidently, it was of such poor quality that it would not meet the standards. The big news is a second spot was tested in 1999, this only came out last year in a deposition to a civil case. This was of high quality, but the Boulder Police, for whatever reason, did not pursue it. So it was only when the new District Attorney took over the case, that she decided it was a number one priority and the Ramseys and their attorney really believe that if and when theres a match, they will have found the murderer of JonBenet.
CC: Its pretty fascinating stuff. Can we get explanations from the Boulder Police as to
GW: Well, they wont give us an explanation (laughing)
CC: Shock surprise.
GW: They declined to comment. Um, certainly, the Ramseys and their attorney believe its because they were so focused on the family that they couldnt see any other outcome, but we dont know that for sure, they will not tell us.
CC: Well, we did get a comment from Lin Wood, the attorney of course, for the Ramseys and uh, this is what he had to say:
This is not new evidence. This is old evidence that was never pursued by the Boulder Police Department. And it was not because it clears the Ramseys. When you find the match to this DNA profile, you will have identified the killer of this child.
Larry, what do you think about this.
(Both Larrys talk at once)
CC: Im sorry, hold on, hold on Larry Posner let me turn to the doctor for just a minute.
LK: Its fascinating and its important because it clears the male members of the household, the family members of JonBenet . Um, so it kind of redirects attention. I too am very surprised that they didnt reveal this sooner, and I think it is perfectly correct that if they dont have a match, a database match at this point, um, certainly if this person were to commit another crime that would result in his DNA being put in a database, uh, then they will get a hit, and they will have their person. But theres no good explanation for the time lag.
CC: Beyond the time lag, you and I have had this conversation over the years, because some people came up with the notion well, maybe it was Asian, male DNA when the underwear was made overseas, or some sort of bizarre
LK: Thats right, because you could just handle a garment and transfer your DNA, and one of the problems is you do not know when the DNA was deposited. I think whats interesting here is that this was not just DNA from ones fingers, but it was actually a blood stain, and that is significant, uh, and my understanding is, the blood originated from JonBenet, so I think it is correct that if male DNA is mixed with that blood, we have a genetic profile of the killer.
CC: And Larry Posner, theres several aspects that a Defense attorney might look at this, obviously in clearing their clients the Ramseys, number one and expanding the investigation, number two, and taking another hard look at, civil suit?
Larry Pozner: Oh, I think so. This is beyond anything one can imagine. If there is a hall of shame for police departments, Boulder makes it on the first ballot. To have this evidence and not pursue it, is, is vicious. It leaves the Ramseys dangling out there. Why, how could you not turn this over to the FBI years ago? You go where the evidence takes you. What the Ramseys have said all along, find who left the DNA I in our daughters underwear, and youll have the murderer. And now to find out that the police ignored that, this is inexcusable.
CC: Apparently, its not just the Boulder Police, but news organizations that might also be looking at lawsuits about various reports, people have talked about the Ramseys being fur, upset with Fox News.
LP: Well, I think the Ramseys have been viciously treated in many homes, in many news media. Whether they are public figures, I dont know, I leave that to the other lawyers that do that kind of work, but one thing we can say, looking back over years, from the beginning, the Ramseys have said publicly, The Boulder Police are trying to smear us and they are not telling America the truth about the facts in this case, and every year thats gone by weve seen more and more evidence that thats exactly true, that the Boulder Police lied to all of us about this case.
CC: Well Gail, tell us about the cooperation, if not from the Boulder Police, then the new DA, who really seems to be trying to rework this case.
GW: Well, she certainly, certainly has. She really has come out and said, she issued a public statement last year when she took over the case from the police department saying that the weight of the evidence indicated that an intruder killed JonBenet, which, as Larry points out, is what the family has been saying all along. Um, there was also a ruling here in Atlanta, with Federal Judge Carnes, in another suit, saying that nearly ALL the evidence pointed towards little family involvement, the only involvement was that they were in the house that night. So I think theyre finally getting some support, they havent had a whole lot of good news over the past seven years.
CC: Ive also read and confirm for me that this is what you understand, that there may have been additional DNA, outside the fam, another male, inside JonBenets fingernails?
GW: Yes, in the first go round, that in 1997 right after the murder, again that was similar to the DNA in the blood spot but it was also considered that it didnt have enough genetic markers to make it possible to submit it to the FBI.
CC: So now what do you do Larry Kobilinsky, can you do anything with it when you have this second spot?
LK: Well, first of all, let me just comment upon the fingernails. Generally speaking, fingernails scrapings are not very useful in terms of DNA, when you generally do DNA testing, you find the genetic profile of the victim. So its not very helpful
CC: (interrupting) Now, how would that be, because you would think, nail fight, wait a minute, somebody elses skin under my nails
LK: I guess its , its a matter of, if there is a scraping of tissue, how much gets under the nails? Uh, you do need a sufficient amount to get a result. And when you dont have enough, sometimes you get, some of the genetic markers revealing information while others do not. I think thats the case there.
CC: Could you get now looking at these two, now, Im making all this up, ten genetic markers from the material under the fingernails matched the ten in the underwear, so we cannot say they are from different people?
LK: Thats correct. Absolutely. That is absolutely correct.
CC: We cant necessarily say they are from the same person, but we cant say its two different people.
LK: That is correct. And like I said, apparently theres nobody that matches the profile on the database, so well have to wait. Now, whats interesting is that pedophiles tend to repeat their crimes with other children and so perhaps this person will strike again.
CC: And we know how hard they are at trying to expand the database, that is a great argument for it. Finally Gail, what about the family, obviously, they have to be, the word elated is maybe inappropriate, but how do they feel about all of this.
Catherine Crier: CC
Dr. Larry Kobilinsky: LK
Larry Pozner: LP
Catherine Crier: Will new evidence in the JonBenet Ramsey case close the umbrella of suspicion on her parents for good? Well investigate.
CC: Hello everybody. Catherine Crier here with tonights first look at todays hot legal stories. And heres something fascinating. Big news in the JonBenet Ramsey investigation. Could a long ignored forensic clue finally point the finger at her killer? The seven year old murder mystery recently took on a new life after DNA evidence was turned over to the FBI for investigation. So what took Boulder Police so long? Tonights thirteenth juror question asks if you think The Boulder Police ignored other leads by just focusing on the Ramseys?
Now with me, forensic scientist Dr. Larry Kobilinsky, hes an associate provost with the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, and in Denver, criminal defense attorney Larry Posner, who has been following the Ramsey investigation closely throughout the years and by phone for People Magazine, correspondent Gail Westcott, who wrote about the new evidence in this weeks issue. So Gail, let me start with you, its not brand new in terms of the cops knowing about it, but its certainly new in term of the public.
Gail Westcott, People Magazine: Well, it turns out that there were two spots of blood found in JonBenets underwear. And the first was much publicized and tested in 1997. And it did contain male DNA, not related to the Ramseys, but evidently, it was of such poor quality that it would not meet the standards. The big news is a second spot was tested in 1999, this only came out last year in a deposition to a civil case. This was of high quality, but the Boulder Police, for whatever reason, did not pursue it. So it was only when the new District Attorney took over the case, that she decided it was a number one priority and the Ramseys and their attorney really believe that if and when theres a match, they will have found the murderer of JonBenet.
CC: Its pretty fascinating stuff. Can we get explanations from the Boulder Police as to
GW: Well, they wont give us an explanation (laughing)
CC: Shock surprise.
GW: They declined to comment. Um, certainly, the Ramseys and their attorney believe its because they were so focused on the family that they couldnt see any other outcome, but we dont know that for sure, they will not tell us.
CC: Well, we did get a comment from Lin Wood, the attorney of course, for the Ramseys and uh, this is what he had to say:
This is not new evidence. This is old evidence that was never pursued by the Boulder Police Department. And it was not because it clears the Ramseys. When you find the match to this DNA profile, you will have identified the killer of this child.
Larry, what do you think about this.
(Both Larrys talk at once)
CC: Im sorry, hold on, hold on Larry Posner let me turn to the doctor for just a minute.
LK: Its fascinating and its important because it clears the male members of the household, the family members of JonBenet . Um, so it kind of redirects attention. I too am very surprised that they didnt reveal this sooner, and I think it is perfectly correct that if they dont have a match, a database match at this point, um, certainly if this person were to commit another crime that would result in his DNA being put in a database, uh, then they will get a hit, and they will have their person. But theres no good explanation for the time lag.
CC: Beyond the time lag, you and I have had this conversation over the years, because some people came up with the notion well, maybe it was Asian, male DNA when the underwear was made overseas, or some sort of bizarre
LK: Thats right, because you could just handle a garment and transfer your DNA, and one of the problems is you do not know when the DNA was deposited. I think whats interesting here is that this was not just DNA from ones fingers, but it was actually a blood stain, and that is significant, uh, and my understanding is, the blood originated from JonBenet, so I think it is correct that if male DNA is mixed with that blood, we have a genetic profile of the killer.
CC: And Larry Posner, theres several aspects that a Defense attorney might look at this, obviously in clearing their clients the Ramseys, number one and expanding the investigation, number two, and taking another hard look at, civil suit?
Larry Pozner: Oh, I think so. This is beyond anything one can imagine. If there is a hall of shame for police departments, Boulder makes it on the first ballot. To have this evidence and not pursue it, is, is vicious. It leaves the Ramseys dangling out there. Why, how could you not turn this over to the FBI years ago? You go where the evidence takes you. What the Ramseys have said all along, find who left the DNA I in our daughters underwear, and youll have the murderer. And now to find out that the police ignored that, this is inexcusable.
CC: Apparently, its not just the Boulder Police, but news organizations that might also be looking at lawsuits about various reports, people have talked about the Ramseys being fur, upset with Fox News.
LP: Well, I think the Ramseys have been viciously treated in many homes, in many news media. Whether they are public figures, I dont know, I leave that to the other lawyers that do that kind of work, but one thing we can say, looking back over years, from the beginning, the Ramseys have said publicly, The Boulder Police are trying to smear us and they are not telling America the truth about the facts in this case, and every year thats gone by weve seen more and more evidence that thats exactly true, that the Boulder Police lied to all of us about this case.
CC: Well Gail, tell us about the cooperation, if not from the Boulder Police, then the new DA, who really seems to be trying to rework this case.
GW: Well, she certainly, certainly has. She really has come out and said, she issued a public statement last year when she took over the case from the police department saying that the weight of the evidence indicated that an intruder killed JonBenet, which, as Larry points out, is what the family has been saying all along. Um, there was also a ruling here in Atlanta, with Federal Judge Carnes, in another suit, saying that nearly ALL the evidence pointed towards little family involvement, the only involvement was that they were in the house that night. So I think theyre finally getting some support, they havent had a whole lot of good news over the past seven years.
CC: Ive also read and confirm for me that this is what you understand, that there may have been additional DNA, outside the fam, another male, inside JonBenets fingernails?
GW: Yes, in the first go round, that in 1997 right after the murder, again that was similar to the DNA in the blood spot but it was also considered that it didnt have enough genetic markers to make it possible to submit it to the FBI.
CC: So now what do you do Larry Kobilinsky, can you do anything with it when you have this second spot?
LK: Well, first of all, let me just comment upon the fingernails. Generally speaking, fingernails scrapings are not very useful in terms of DNA, when you generally do DNA testing, you find the genetic profile of the victim. So its not very helpful
CC: (interrupting) Now, how would that be, because you would think, nail fight, wait a minute, somebody elses skin under my nails
LK: I guess its , its a matter of, if there is a scraping of tissue, how much gets under the nails? Uh, you do need a sufficient amount to get a result. And when you dont have enough, sometimes you get, some of the genetic markers revealing information while others do not. I think thats the case there.
CC: Could you get now looking at these two, now, Im making all this up, ten genetic markers from the material under the fingernails matched the ten in the underwear, so we cannot say they are from different people?
LK: Thats correct. Absolutely. That is absolutely correct.
CC: We cant necessarily say they are from the same person, but we cant say its two different people.
LK: That is correct. And like I said, apparently theres nobody that matches the profile on the database, so well have to wait. Now, whats interesting is that pedophiles tend to repeat their crimes with other children and so perhaps this person will strike again.
CC: And we know how hard they are at trying to expand the database, that is a great argument for it. Finally Gail, what about the family, obviously, they have to be, the word elated is maybe inappropriate, but how do they feel about all of this.
