DNA Clears Ramsey Family!

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by Spydernweb, Jul 9, 2008.

  1. Spydernweb

    Spydernweb New Member

    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  2. Loading...


  3. mssheila

    mssheila New Member

    Messages:
    1,568
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    whoa :confused: If they had DNA, what the heck took so long?
     
  4. RiverRat

    RiverRat Patsy Ramsey to the Left

    Messages:
    2,909
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    LOL - this is coming from the same woman that brought John Mark Karr to the table, so please think twice before falling for another Ram Scam!!! Mary Keenan Lacy is notorious for going out of her way to support criminals and is on her way out of office in a few months, so this nonsense is nothing more than her Going Away gift to the remaining Ramseys as Karr was for Patsy.
     
  5. Starryskye

    Starryskye New Member

    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Still, I think they probably had something to do with it...just my personal opinion.
     
  6. imnotheonlyone

    imnotheonlyone New Member

    Messages:
    1,343
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:
     
  7. gracefuljf1505

    gracefuljf1505 I love life as a mommy!!!!!

    Messages:
    739
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree I still think they had something to do it as well there are alot of people in law enforcement who know that the ramseys did it and are either protecting them or cant find the evidence to proove it. its sad but true...we need to find a way to week out the croked law enforcement IMO I am going to school to protect the people from criminals not the other way around! I dont think they will ever convict the Ramseys but I do know that the after life will give them what they deserve
     
  8. Lola

    Lola New Member

    Messages:
    1,432
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This DNA testing technique is new. It's called touch DNA --it was used in the Peter Falconio case to convict Bradley Murdoch.
     
  9. Adalena935

    Adalena935 New Member

    Messages:
    729
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Remseys aren't criminals.
     
  10. Adalena935

    Adalena935 New Member

    Messages:
    729
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  11. Adalena935

    Adalena935 New Member

    Messages:
    729
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The new test also ruled out anyone in a large criminal DNA database. The results do point to an unknown man, authorities said.

    From the above link. In a tv documentary aired several times over the years it was said there was a known rapist breaking & entering homes in the area at the time. Unfortunately he was never apprehended or even ID'd.

    It's a pity when people are convicted out of court because that gives free reign to real criminals who reign their evil onto real victims unfettered by real justice.

    My incorrect spelling of the Ramsey's name was a typo.
     
  12. Adalena935

    Adalena935 New Member

    Messages:
    729
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Can you imagine the grief of being accused of being your beloved child's murder? There has been so many cases over the years of parents wrongly accused by the public of being their own child's murder. One widowed Mother of a young girl said; "I loved her more than my own life." Heartbreaking any parent would have to endure such cruelty.
     
  13. T-Rex

    T-Rex New Member

    Messages:
    1,299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, I'm skeptical, but if it's the same unidentified (male) DNA in the crotch of her panties, and on the sides of her long johns, I'd like to hear more.
     
  14. philamena

    philamena Former Member

    Messages:
    7,766
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Cleared my azz. Mary Lacy thought JMK killed JonBebet.
    Patsy killed JBR and John helped cover it up. I'd bet my life on it.
     
  15. Adalena935

    Adalena935 New Member

    Messages:
    729
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Here's about Bode Technology Group near Washington DC that developed the technique. They have a lot of forensic experience both states & Federal. I think it's so wonderful the technology that's being developed for forensic analysis. I've read articles that say they're solving a lot of Cold Cases some decades old with use of new technology. I think that's double teriffic. Gets more killers and rapists and violent offenders out of society where they can hurt other innocents.

    http://www.bodetech.com/about/overview.html
     
  16. Spydernweb

    Spydernweb New Member

    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Apparently the new touch DNA results match the earlier DNA results that were done on Jon Benet's underware. The touch DNA recently done was from her leggings. Both DNA results came out to an unknown Male, not a family member or person whose DNA was collected to have known the Ramsey's.

    Just because Ms. Lacy was wrong about Karr doesn't mean the DNA is wrong. Ms. Lacy had an obligation to investigate Mr Karr, Justice demanded no less. Two independant labs have the same DNA results done in two types of tests. How much more proof do you want before the witchhunt on the Ramsey's ends?

    I too felt for a long time that the Ramsey's were involved. However I respect DNA evidence and the facts that 2 independant labs obtained the same results sways my belief to change. How can remaining steadfast in your conviction after being proven scientifically wrong help solve the murder in any way?

    Personally I want the correct murderer caught and convicted. Soceity has no place for a child killer. Slinging mud without proof does not solve the case. Suspicions do not solve murder cases, but DNA results do.


    JMHO

    Hugs,
    Spyder
     
  17. Jeana (DP)

    Jeana (DP) Former Member

    Messages:
    26,902
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Here's another good link about the new technology:

    http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/april2008/touch_dna.html
     
  18. RiverRat

    RiverRat Patsy Ramsey to the Left

    Messages:
    2,909
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's your opinion - definitely not a fact in this case. They are criminals that evaded charges in my eyes.
     
  19. RiverRat

    RiverRat Patsy Ramsey to the Left

    Messages:
    2,909
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :clap: That's a pretty safe bet!
     
  20. gardenmom

    gardenmom Former Member

    Messages:
    3,328
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't even follow this case that closely, and even I know that this is not new information. There has always been unexplained DNA on the panties. IIRC they said it could have been from a factory worker who touched the panties as they were manufactured. This is spin, so I don't know why it is suddenly newsworthy again. :confused:
     
  21. Jeana (DP)

    Jeana (DP) Former Member

    Messages:
    26,902
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Originally Posted by Nedthan Johns
    Okay here is what I found out. As you all may or may not know having followed this case for years and working in the Biotech industry I have direct access to very bright people who know a lot about DNA. Touch DNA is just a fancy term (one they never heard of and probably dubbed by the media they said) for a small or incomplete DNA marker. Such as a single cell found on clothing, which is what we have here according to Lacy in 3 places , she states: the presence of the same male DNA in three places on the girl's clothing convinced investigators it belonged to JonBenet's killer and had not been left accidentally by an innocent party.

    According to several of the Ph.D.'s I spoke with this is significant because the odds of it being in so many places and linked directly to the blood found in her panties, does in fact point to a third party. Again these markers are incomplete hence (my favorite Pasty Ramsey word) the word Touch DNA. It's a small sample, again where they can exclude someone but not link someone directly to the crime. So what are the odds this DNA is similar in 3 places on her longjohns? Probably more significant then finding them on her outer clothing. The consenes was by my group, THIS IS HUGE. Is the statement then accurate or too bold for Lacy to say the parents are vindicated? The group here thinks there was a third party in that house. I'm stunned.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice