Skin cell transfer mode poll 2 of 3

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by Holdontoyourhat, Aug 6, 2010.

?

Skin cells were transferred directly or indirectly?

  1. Skin cells shed to another person or object first.

    44.4%
  2. Skin cells shed directly from its owner to longjohns.

    55.6%
  1. Holdontoyourhat

    Holdontoyourhat Former Member

    Messages:
    5,299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Were the subject skin cells shed onto another object or person first, and then eventually transferred to JBR’s longjohns,

    OR

    were the subject skin cells shed directly by its owner onto JBR’s longjohns?
     
  2. Loading...


  3. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,188
    Likes Received:
    146
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Holdontoyourhat,

    Nobody knows, and nobody can offer a balanced opinion since the touch-dna may have been deposited by either route.

    And since the probability of either event cannot be computed nobody including you can claim to know otherwise.

    An IDI based on touch-dna is nonsense!


    .
     
  4. Holdontoyourhat

    Holdontoyourhat Former Member

    Messages:
    5,299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Of course its nonsense, if you don't understand or take into consideration the context!

    Several RDI posters will avoid the context issue like the plague, while any serious discussion on forensic DNA analysis will note how investigators use context to locate and test for DNA. The fact that you place zero significance on DNA found in solution with JBR's blood, as well as matching DNA in two places on the longjohn waistband, an object known to have been handled by a criminal, says it all.

    I'd suggest reading up on the context aspect, as it is clear you'r'e not including it in any of your discussions. The context issue is real, part of investigative work, and why JR got an exhoneration letter. Its not going away just because you don't acknowledge it exists.

    Why doesn't RDI ever use a complete description of the DNA? Its as vague as possible. Please provide one post of yours that describes 'waistband DNA' or 'blood stain DNA'. I'm quite sure you'll refer to both simply as 'underwear DNA' to promote the factory worker idea.
     
  5. tragco

    tragco Member

    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    If you get some time please post some links or provide some context. I'd really like to learn more about the DNA evidence and seems like you have some good info from somewhere. I have read some of your other posts regarding the subject, but if you have more, a complete description of the DNA, context, I'd be quite interested and grateful. TIA.

    (I have googled, but seem to find either generic info unrelated to this particular case or posts from sites I am not so sure are reliable).
     

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