DNA links Denver burglary, child assault

New Posts

L

LovelyPigeon

Former Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2004
Messages
13,806
Reaction score
19
This is the kind of story I expect to read about the JonBenét Ramsey case in the near future:

DNA links suspect to burglary, attempted assault on child
Written By: Jeannie Piper, Web Producer created: 3/15/2004 5:34:48 PM
updated: 3/15/2004 7:18:10 PM
DENVER - DNA evidence has linked a man to a burglary and attempted sexual assault that happened almost two years ago.


Juan Hernandez-Garcia has been formally charged with second-degree burglar and attempted sexual assault on a child in July of 2002.

Police believe he crawled through an open window of a Denver home, where he was found in a 10-year-old girl's room. He fled when she started screaming.

DNA taken from the crime scene at the home was recently matched to 31-year-old Hernandez-Garcia, who began serving a jail sentence in January for criminal trespass.

http://www.9news.com/storyfull.aspx?storyid=25532
 
Originally posted by LovelyPigeon
This is the kind of story I expect to read about the JonBenét Ramsey case in the near future:
Click to expand...
Don't hold your breath.

imo
 
It would have been nice if the article told us more detail. What was the source of the DNA?
 
LovelyPigeon said:
This is the kind of story I expect to read about the JonBenét Ramsey case in the near future.
Click to expand...

DNA, DNA, bla, bla, bla. Nothing will ever come from the DNA in the Ramsey case. :snooty:

(And now, BlueCrab will post DNA will prove Burke and possibly one other juvenile did it.) :crazy:
 
The source of the DNA hasn't appeared in any article I can find yet, but since the charge is attempted sexual assault we could guess that the DNA might have been retrieved from seminal fluid, semen, or saliva.

A man already serving a Colorado Department of Corrections sentence was charged Monday with burglary and attempted sexual assault of a child after authorities matched him to DNA samples collected two years ago.
Juan Hernandez-Garcia, 31, is suspected of crawling through an open kitchen window of a Denver home in July 2002, according to the Denver District Attorney's office, and entering a 10-year-old girl's room. She screamed and the intruder fled.
DNA was recovered and submitted to a database, but no suspect was identified at the time.

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~53~2019859,00.html
 
LovelyPigeon said:
The source of the DNA hasn't appeared in any article I can find yet, but since the charge is attempted sexual assault we could guess that the DNA might have been retrieved from seminal fluid, semen, or saliva.

A man already serving a Colorado Department of Corrections sentence was charged Monday with burglary and attempted sexual assault of a child after authorities matched him to DNA samples collected two years ago.
Juan Hernandez-Garcia, 31, is suspected of crawling through an open kitchen window of a Denver home in July 2002, according to the Denver District Attorney's office, and entering a 10-year-old girl's room. She screamed and the intruder fled.
DNA was recovered and submitted to a database, but no suspect was identified at the time.

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~53~2019859,00.html
Click to expand...

There is no "foreign" DNA that will nail some elusive intruder in the Ramsey case. Wishful thinking. First of all, it is patently obvious that if it was "intruder" in the Ramsey home for THAT long and who did THAT much to JonBenet - his DNA would be plentiful. Trouble for you intruder did it theorists/dreamers is that there in fact is NOT. There IS however - Patsy Ramseys clothing fibers entwined in her daughter's cord/knot around her neck, in the paint tote that the perp took and broke the paintbrush from, and on the black duct tape that was put on JonBenet's mouth.
Most DNA from her parents could be argued as being logically present as JonBenet lived in the same house as them.
Minute, teeny-weeny, specks of what RST likes to call "foreign DNA" may not even be able to be analyzed properly as it is too small a trace. Were a true intruder in that house for "hours" as the Ramseys like to claim - there would be a mountain of it.
And if there is enough of a speck to analyze - AGAIN - it does NOT mean it was left there by an "intruder". It could have come from a transfer source in some innocent way. How about all those neighborhood kids that JonBenet and Burke played with all day of the 25th? The speck of DNA could have been transferred to JonBenet's hands via one of them - or an object she touched that had DNA on it from some other source and then she touched herself or her underwear when using the potty.
I mean - it's just so obvious. You are grasping at straws trying to fit a theory of an "intruder" into this DNA thing. It's just NOT going to work.
And - of course to date - it hasn't. No "intruder" was discovered in any database were they? Because they do not list the DNA of ghosts.
 
LovelyPigeon said:
The source of the DNA hasn't appeared in any article I can find yet, but since the charge is attempted sexual assault we could guess that the DNA might have been retrieved from seminal fluid, semen, or saliva.
Click to expand...
When I read it and saw that she screamed when he entered her room, I thought maybe he cut himself climbing through the window and left blood or skin behind. Hopefully they may post more info in a future article.
 
K777Angel, the male DNA recovered from a 2nd spot of blood on JonBenét's panties is sufficiently "good" enough and "large" enough to have been submitted by the Boulder District Attorney's office to the FBI for ongoing comparison to their CODIS data base.

The male DNA from under JonBenét's fingernails is consistent with the DNA from the 1st and 2nd tested spots of blood on the panties.

This male DNA, as we all know, does not match any of the Ramseys.
 
He fled when she started screaming doesn't make it crystal clear on whether he had begun sexually assaulting her before she screamed or not.

I'm so glad this DNA "match" system resulted in his arrest. Forensic use of DNA is still an emerging science, but it's already a powerful one.
 
LovelyPigeon said:
the male DNA recovered from a 2nd spot of blood on JonBenét's panties is sufficiently "good" enough and "large" enough to have been submitted by the Boulder District Attorney's office to the FBI for ongoing comparison to their CODIS data base.

The male DNA from under JonBenét's fingernails is consistent with the DNA from the 1st and 2nd tested spots of blood on the panties.
Click to expand...
Another investigator with expertise on forensic issues, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity, confirmed the theory that the underwear DNA might be the result of point-of-production contamination.

And, wherever it came from, that investigator said, "We certainly don't think it is attributable to an assailant. That's our belief. When you take everything else in total, it doesn't make sense. I've always said this is not a DNA case. It's not hinging on DNA evidence."

Wood also pointed out that unidentified DNA was also recovered from beneath JonBenet's fingernails on both hands. But investigators have long said that contamination problems render those samples of little value.
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/ramsey/article/0,1299,DRMN_1296_1554639,00.html
 
Those "anonymous investigators" carry no weight with me. I'll stick with the opinion of the best and most experienced detective who has worked the case, Lou Smit.

While the male DNA samples from the fingernails are apparently incomplete, they are consistent with the male DNA found with 2 blood spots on the crotch of the panties. Statistically that speaks quite loudly.
 
LovelyPigeon said:
I'll stick with the opinion of the best and most experienced detective who has worked the case, Lou Smit.
Click to expand...
Oh, you mean the guy who claims a blue electrical arc can turn a person's skin blue?
It's rather doubtful that same guy could even begin to understand DNA technology.
 
A friend of mine explained how she ordered blue tinted headlights for her car yesterday. They operate using an electrical arc in some kind of gas. I told her to be careful with the electrical arc or she will turn into a blue smurf :eek:
 
LovelyPigeon said:
Those "anonymous investigators" carry no weight with me. I'll stick with the opinion of the best and most experienced detective who has worked the case, Lou Smit.

While the male DNA samples from the fingernails are apparently incomplete, they are consistent with the male DNA found with 2 blood spots on the crotch of the panties. Statistically that speaks quite loudly.
Click to expand...


Yes it does,I would love to know the actual stats,is it something like 1/64000 when you have at least five markers to compare to 12?
I agree,if the perp is alive,if he is currently residing in these United States,one day he will be found through his dna.
Thanks LP for the article:)
imo
 
You are sooo right Angel in that the DNA can belong to anyone.

Let's say that JonBenet was bathed Christmas Eve and then the family went to Church. JonBenet must of shook hands with parishoners as is custumary. She could have used the potty there, played on the floor, etc...

Then it was on to Pasta Jays. She was wearing a beautiful PURPLE dress, exposing her panties to the chair she sat in. Again, JonBenet could have used the potty, shook hands with friends, etc..

She went to bed Christmas eve wearing her pink pajamas. She woke up the next morning, excited to open her presents. She was in and out all day visiting neighbors.

The point I am trying to make is this...WHO SAYS THE "FOREIGN DNA" BELONGS TO AN INTRUDER???
 
You guys need to do some research. Here's how it works. JB's DNA has a code for the sake of simplicity let's say AABB. She got the AA from Patsy and the BB from John. {{hopefully}} Now the DNA on her body was AABBC, so they know the C belongs to someone else. It can't be Burke, because he would have to have a similar genetic code to JB. Pay attention BlueCrab.

Now they can test people all over the place - you, me and the gatepost. As long as they don't have a C in their genetic makeup, they are not the contributor - however, if they do have a C, it does not mean they are the contributor of this particular sample - simply that they cannot be ruled out.

So, if it's me, I can account for my whereabouts that night or whenever, so I am not their suspect. If it's you, you can probably also account for your whereabouts. And for sure the guy who sweat on the panties as they were being manufactured half way around the world can account for his whereabouts that night.

The DNA is degraded. That means that it is either contaminated with a non human substance, or just plain old. Pick one. It can rule people out as being the contributor - meaning they did not sweat on the panties during manufacture, but it cannot positively identify the sweater, or would that be sweatee?

To use the parlance of the trade - the DNA is a RED HERRING!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 187 more.
Total: 4,025 (members: 188, guests: 3,837)

Online statistics

Members online
188
Guests online
3,837
Total visitors
4,025
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,831
Messages
17,959,757
Members
228,621
Latest member
Greer∆
Back
Top