Hey, don't call me Shirley. I made a similar point on another thread, but I just want to put this out there for some discussion, as I believe it addresses some of the core case issues, and it's about time we stopped going around in circles... If the case DNA had always been considered proof of an intruder, there is no way the Ramseys would have been under suspicion for the last ten years, weird and obstructive behavior or not. Yet they have. I would therefore suggest that either the case DNA sample is tainted and/or inadequate for a 'beyond reasonable doubt' comparison; or the authorities believe that the case DNA is unlikely to be the DNA of the killer. If there had been clear and unequivocal evidence of an intruder, there is no way the Ramseys would have been under suspicion for the last ten years, weird and obstructive behavior or not. There wasn't. The case has never added up. Whether people want to believe it or not, RDI remains the least confusing option. Unless JonBenet was really killed by a devil doll (hey, why did Patsy get rid of the Mytwinn so quickly?) the prospects for IDI have never looked good.