Intruder theories only. No posts from rdi members allowed

[slug]

The weak number of markers in the DNA is one reason I'm not a RDI or IDI because either way there is going to need to be an answer for this to ever to be concluded without some doubt.
The fact that it is TDNA is more of a problem as it could be from the killer, an accomplice, family or friends.
If JonB was not killed by her family then I feel it was definatly someone who knew the house and the family well, I don't have any definate suspect but would love to know if the DNA was a partial match to any of the people tested as can't find any info on that.
And do wonder on how the chain of evidence of the items tested was considering the way JR carried her upstairs maybe some TDNA got transfered then.
Anyway just a few thoughts i've been having.

 

[Roy23]

Okay, fellas. You've made your point. I'm going. I'm going!

Thanks Dave. No offense, but we know how these things turn out. And none of us have all their facts correct.

 

[Roy23]

The weak number of markers in the DNA is one reason I'm not a RDI or IDI because either way there is going to need to be an answer for this to ever to be concluded without some doubt.
The fact that it is TDNA is more of a problem as it could be from the killer, an accomplice, family or friends.
If JonB was not killed by her family then I feel it was definatly someone who knew the house and the family well, I don't have any definate suspect but would love to know if the DNA was a partial match to any of the people tested as can't find any info on that.
And do wonder on how the chain of evidence of the items tested was considering the way JR carried her upstairs maybe some TDNA got transfered then.
Anyway just a few thoughts i've been having.

The DNA and touch DNA has been tested against hundreds of people. It is not matched to anyone. So the Tdna doesn't match family, friends, or anyone that has been tested. Put your thinking cap on.

 

[slug]

Does anyone know if they looked for Mitochondrial DNA cos they could then run familiar searches which would have a higher chance of finding some link to the killer?

The DNA not matching does mean there is a link to someone not looked at knowing who might give some better clue to what happened.

 

[2 percent]

If your question has nothing to do with IDI why did you post it on this thread? I'm not setting any standards. I only posted the FBI's standards.

I was responding to the subject at hand, the DNA. That subject is not inherently IDI.

I don't get your statement that "we've all been run off." I only saw one person told not to post on the RDI thread. If you don't want to answer my question that's fine with me.

By separating the discussion into two threads, everyone was run off from the thread that didn't apply to their theoretical bent. The separation of the two threads had a stated purpose and a was posted on the forum for everyone to read.
Again, I won't comment on anyone's actions but my own.

 

[RANCH]

I was responding to the subject at hand, the DNA. That subject is not inherently IDI.



By separating the discussion into two threads, everyone was run off from the thread that didn't apply to their theoretical bent. The separation of the two threads had a stated purpose and a was posted on the forum for everyone to read.
Again, I won't comment on anyone's actions but my own.

If you want to post how the DNA points towards RDI should you post that on the RDI thread. And your posting on both threads so you haven't been run off anywhere. I'm not getting your point at all.

 

[2 percent]

If you want to post how the DNA points towards RDI should you post that on the RDI thread.

My posting was clarification only.

I'm not getting your point at all.

I posted within the boundaries prescribed to me on both threads. I post RDI beliefs and theories on that thread and I have and will post clarifications without opinion on the IDI thread if I find it necessary.

 

[Tadpole12]

Kolar interview:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/websleuths/2012/07/19/websleuths-radio


@10:06

And then there's the other sample
in the underwear that's called distal stain
007-2, that's the strongest sample.

And real quickly if your not familiar with
the dna
it's uhm, genetic markers that are unique
similar to like finger prints,
but it's newer technology obviously.

And there's 13 genetic markers that are
used to identify a person, and ah,
this initial sample had only had 9 markers,

and the National dna index,
where unknown samples known samples
are collected and put into a data base.

The FBI requires ten markers to be available
in order for the sample
to be submitted for that.

And it took quite some time
before technology came along where
that tenth marker was able to be identified
and that's discussed in the book
to talk about how that happened
And when it finally got put into play.

It was about 2002, 2003 I believe
if memory serves that that tenth marker was
finally developed by the Denver PD lab.
And then it was allowed to be entered into
the unknown forensic file so that it could be
compared against any other unknowns
coming in
collected from the crime scenes
from around the country.

 

[RANCH]

My posting was clarification only.



I posted within the boundaries prescribed to me on both threads. I post RDI beliefs and theories on that thread and I have and will post clarifications without opinion on the IDI thread if I find it necessary.

Next time you post a clarification make sure you've got the facts right. It appears that people are coming on this thread to "help" but are in fact posting inaccurate information like the minimum number of markers needed for forensic DNA profiles to be submitted to NDIS.

I don't call that clarifying, I call it muddying the waters.

 

[deca]

So basically as technology advanced, they were able to retrieve a more complete copy of the DNA.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

This thread is about support of IDI or other theories than RDI..

Please keep anything that is supporting RDI in the other threads. THanks..

I asked a valid question there and was ridiculed again..

So if you are not in support of IDI or a theory that does not involve the R's Then please leave this thread be..

Thanks.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I really think that if the police had done a better job, Called in the FBI at the first call when the child was missing and searched the house better this would be solved.

They made so many mistakes and I think they used the mistakes to point at the R's because they could not solve it.

Throwing suspicion onto the R's solved all their problems.

They have nothing on the R's that says they did this.

 

[2 percent]

Called in the FBI at the first call when the child was missing...

BPD consulted with the FBI within an hour because it was a kidnapping case and recorders and tracers had to be set up.
The FBI didn't show up at the scene until after the body was found. Once the body was found, it was no longer a kidnapping case.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

They should have called them the minute they knew they had a kidnapping. Not an hour later. They would have most probably helped them not screw the entire scene up.

 

[Chelly]

They should have called them the minute they knew they had a kidnapping. Not an hour later. They would have most probably helped them not screw the entire scene up.

Police first had to get to the crime scene to determine there had in fact been a kidnapping, question the R's and the group of friends and associates the R's had assembled together at the home to muck up the evidence. It must have been like herding kittens at that house. With the chaos the R's created , I'm amazed police managed to make that call to FBI within an hour.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

What bothers me most is all the false information that was leaked immediately that I think made people believe this was the R's right away when the things released were false.

Starting with saying there was no intruder because there as no footprints in the snow.

It seems early on the cops focused on the R's to cover up their own shotty work from the beginning..

 

[Chelly]

I will admit that BPD was certainly the F-Troup of police depts.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

They get a call about a kidnapping and show up in marked cars. They ruined this case from the beginning and then to make themselves look okay they pointed fingers at the R's to save their own tookuses..

 

[2 percent]

They get a call about a kidnapping and show up in marked cars. They ruined this case from the beginning and then to make themselves look okay they pointed fingers at the R's to save their own tookuses..

I'm inclined to think the media is more to blame here. In the last 20 years they've been very unprofessional about checking their facts before reporting them. OJ, JB, Columbine, 9/11, criminal incidents in Afghanistan and Iraq, Bush and the National Guard, Giffords shooting and most recently (and the two worst by far) Sandy Hook and George Zimmerman. Sometimes I wonder if they just make this stuff up out of thin air!

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Well I disagree because the police was feeding he media machine. So still it lays at the polices feet.