Nobody is cleared!

[Toltec]

Let's not forget...JonBenet did not bathe Christmas day. Her last bath was I believe Christmas Eve. She had dinner at Pasta Jay's...(could she have used the toilet?) She went to her little friend Kostanziks home...she went to the White home...

She played outside Christmas day, spent time with friends, rode her bike, played at the White's home....

Lot's of DNA she could have picked up in a 24 hour period.

 

[LI_Mom]

Let's not forget...JonBenet did not bathe Christmas day. Her last bath was I believe Christmas Eve. She had dinner at Pasta Jay's...(could she have used the toilet?) She went to her little friend Kostanziks home...she went to the White home...

She played outside Christmas day, spent time with friends, rode her bike, played at the White's home....

Lot's of DNA she could have picked up in a 24 hour period.

Exactly.

And once again, I ask.... did they get dna samples from all the little BOYS that were at the party & known to be playing with her that day?

6 year old kids play doctor.... children sneeze, cough, lick their fingers & touch all sorts of surfaces.

Then they touch themselves.

And since Patsy says she was sleeping BEFORE they got home... we know her hands weren't washed before she was put into bed.

 

[DeeDee249]

The DNA couldn't have been JBR's. It is from a male. BUT she could have picked it up on her own hands touching pretty much ANYTHING that day- how many men and boys were at the White's? And then transferred to her longjohns herself, in the act of pulling them up and down.
I think most people recognize that, mostly because of her brother's testimony and the pineapple in her stomach that she was indeed awake at some point after the arrived home from the White's.
So it wasn't just a matter of someone else pulling them up and down.

Just suppose it had belonged to some innocent guest at the party and JBR picked it up touching a doorknob. THEN along comes Lacy and her parade of clowns at the DA's office and LOOK! WE HAVE THE KILLER'S DNA PROFILE! Some poor guest- someone's father, someone's husband- gets sold down the river because the Rs are too gutless to step forward and the DA's office too scared of the R lawyers so they railroad the guy right into a life sentence. Case closed!
This was perhaps even more irresponsible and dangerous than the Karr circus.
This DNA clears no one. It doesn't mean they didn't commit this crime and/or the coverup. All it does is prove that there is male DNA on her CLOTHES that doesn't belong to an IMMEDIATE family member- and that's it.

 

[Chrishope]

The DNA couldn't have been JBR's. It is from a male. BUT she could have picked it up on her own hands touching pretty much ANYTHING that day- how many men and boys were at the White's? And then transferred to her longjohns herself, in the act of pulling them up and down.
I think most people recognize that, mostly because of her brother's testimony and the pineapple in her stomach that she was indeed awake at some point after the arrived home from the White's.
So it wasn't just a matter of someone else pulling them up and down.

Just suppose it had belonged to some innocent guest at the party and JBR picked it up touching a doorknob. THEN along comes Lacy and her parade of clowns at the DA's office and LOOK! WE HAVE THE KILLER'S DNA PROFILE! Some poor guest- someone's father, someone's husband- gets sold down the river because the Rs are too gutless to step forward and the DA's office too scared of the R lawyers so they railroad the guy right into a life sentence. Case closed!
This was perhaps even more irresponsible and dangerous than the Karr circus.
This DNA clears no one. It doesn't mean they didn't commit this crime and/or the coverup. All it does is prove that there is male DNA on her CLOTHES that doesn't belong to an IMMEDIATE family member- and that's it.

Absolutely right, it only proves there is unidentified male dna not belonging to a family member.

I think what is more likely than railroading an innocent is that they never get a match (because it's from someone never tested and not in CODIS) so there is never any way to prove that the dna isn't from the killer. (And I'm not saying the dna definitely isn't from the killer, just that it may not be) There will then always be this unexplained dna which will keep alive the intruder theory and keep the R's from ever being tried - not that it's very likely anyway.

 

[coloradokares]

So I suppose this means it's absolutely impossible that this victim had contact with another male BEFORE she met her killer?????

I think this type of excluding of suspects is VERY, VERY flimsy & can end up letting a whole lot of criminals walk.

We're not examining people who were in test tubes up until they were murdered... they had contact with other humans.

Another Colorado Fiasco Tim Masters was convicted of murder until this touch dna was used to clear Him I do not get how touch Dna overturns convictions.

 

[tezi]

Another Colorado Fiasco Tim Masters was convicted of murder until this touch dna was used to clear Him I do not get how touch Dna overturns convictions.

Isn't he from Ft. Collins? I vaguely remember the case. I lived in Longmont at the time of the murder. I still think he did it. He caught a lucky break, IMO. IIRC, there was other evidence that connected him to his victim. I also think the DA decided NOT to retry him.

 

[Red Dragon]

Lacy owes me an apology for harshing my beer buzz when I channel hopped to a news segment carrying the story at 9 pm.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Another Colorado Fiasco Tim Masters was convicted of murder until this touch dna was used to clear Him I do not get how touch Dna overturns convictions.

I think most of these cases are overturned because 1) the defendant always protested their innocence and (2 there was never any forensic evidence linking them to the crime ( or dna evidence wasn't done at the time even though items were available).

When there was new DNA technology done on the evidence they had then it was shown that the DNA evidence found on the victim's clothing or body did not belong to the one accused but to someone else. In most of these cases they already know who the real killer is by this time due to their dna profile being in CODIS from other crimes but there are other cases where the killer's identity remains unknown because there is not a matching profile or hit when it is entered into CODIS. New profiles are being entered in vast numbers everyday and they are being able to match up suspects with old, cold cases that have remained unsolved for decades.



imoo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Considering that they entered it into CODIS five years ago when it was far from full, that hardly proves anything, oceanblueeyes.

But as we all are aware, Dave, DNA technology does not stand still, not even 5 years. We continue to advance.

The profile from the skin cells may be a much clearer profile than what was found on another garment and tested years ago. What once was the standards needed then are no longer the case.

imoo

 

[coloradokares]

So I suppose this means it's absolutely impossible that this victim had contact with another male BEFORE she met her killer?????

I think this type of excluding of suspects is VERY, VERY flimsy & can end up letting a whole lot of criminals walk.

We're not examining people who were in test tubes up until they were murdered... they had contact with other humans.

This too was Colorado and this was murder> The body was found top shoved up and bottoms shoved down and like many of you I can think of many way a couple cells can end up on someone innocently. I would have wanted more proof But thats me I really am not as well read on the Masters case as regards JonBenet.

 

[coloradokares]

Isn't he from Ft. Collins? I vaguely remember the case. I lived in Longmont at the time of the murder. I still think he did it. He caught a lucky break, IMO. IIRC, there was other evidence that connected him to his victim. I also think the DA decided NOT to retry him.

I should say he got a break he is walking free and there was imho more evidence of guilt than innocense. I agree the DA let it go because of course ..... reasonable doubt!

 

[BBB167893]

But as we all are aware, Dave, DNA technology does not stand still, not even 5 years. We continue to advance.

The profile from the skin cells may be a much clearer profile than what was found on another garment and tested years ago. What once was the standards needed then are no longer the case.

That's true. But an advance is not the same as progress. I mean, we keep being told that they didn't need to use LCN, they used the standard way. But the standard tests themselves have improved by leaps and bounds, so I'm not too shaken up by that.

 

[UKGuy]

Exactly.

And once again, I ask.... did they get dna samples from all the little BOYS that were at the party & known to be playing with her that day?

6 year old kids play doctor.... children sneeze, cough, lick their fingers & touch all sorts of surfaces.

Then they touch themselves.

And since Patsy says she was sleeping BEFORE they got home... we know her hands weren't washed before she was put into bed.

LI_Mom,

Whose bed, John's or Burkes? JonBenet was awake on returning home since she patently snacked on pineapple, whilst Burke sipped some tea, a nice convivial domestic treat on returning from the White's.

JonBenet sleeping in her bed is the Parents version of events and it may be fabricated.


.

 

[LI_Mom]

LI_Mom,

Whose bed, John's or Burkes? JonBenet was awake on returning home since she patently snacked on pineapple, whilst Burke sipped some tea, a nice convivial domestic treat on returning from the White's.

JonBenet sleeping in her bed is the Parents version of events and it may be fabricated.


.

I'm only going by the Ramsey's official version(s).

They dressed a sleeping JB for bed......

I can't imagine ANY parent on the planet washing a sleeping child's hands with soap & water before pulling the covers up.

Child is sleeping with dirty hands, that's for sure.


IMO, it's still a possibility that the dna might be found to match one of the little boys they can't be bothered to test.... or some other innocent source.

 

[UKGuy]

I'm only going by the Ramsey's official version(s).

They dressed a sleeping JB for bed......

I can't imagine ANY parent on the planet washing a sleeping child's hands with soap & water before pulling the covers up.

Child is sleeping with dirty hands, that's for sure.


IMO, it's still a possibility that the dna might be found to match one of the little boys they can't be bothered to test.... or some other innocent source.

LI_Mom,

IMO, it's still a possibility that the dna might be found to match one of the little boys they can't be bothered to test.... or some other innocent source.

Assuming the parents version of events is correct and that the transfer is innocent. If the parents version of events is fabricated how come the transfer to clean longjohns occured, accidently as JonBenet was moved into position for redressing?

Simply the dna does not change anything, it offers an explanation for the panty dna, which was not available before. Also there is no release of any other foreign dna discovered on JonBenet? e.g. was her body clean, as in wiped down, is there only dna artifacts to be discovered on the longjohns and size-12's, both items clean on her that night, has the white gap-top been tested?

Without answers to these questions the dna is alike any other foreign dna found in the ramsey household, simply environmental debri, it has no status and no link to any intruder.