The Misdirection and Deception of the DNA

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by Cottonstar, Apr 13, 2018.

  1. FY1234

    FY1234 Member

    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Cottonstar:

    It makes sense for all the bloodstained items to be in the basement.
    Why did both the nightgown and the sequin top have bloodstains? She was either wearing one or the other when she was attacked and killed so how did blood get on the other item?
     
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2018
    Tadpole12 likes this.


  2. Cottonstar

    Cottonstar Victimologist

    Messages:
    1,020
    Likes Received:
    1,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The urine stained long johns, that JonBenét was found in are confirmed to be Boys sz 6-8, JE Morgan Arctex long underwear.

    upload_2018-12-5_19-21-12.jpeg

    upload_2018-12-5_19-23-15.jpeg

    CS
     

    Attached Files:

    questfortrue likes this.
  3. Cottonstar

    Cottonstar Victimologist

    Messages:
    1,020
    Likes Received:
    1,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
  4. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,760
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Cottonstar,
    Nice images, so does:

    Mean Medium, Ages 10 to 12?

    .
     
  5. fr brown

    fr brown Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    716
    Likes Received:
    1,267
    Trophy Points:
    93
    I think it's likely that Patsy put JonBenet to bed in the red turtleneck and some kind of long johns (if not those particular long johns) because she was expecting to take a sleeping child out into the cold before dawn. You'd want the kid to be dressed warmly, but you wouldn't want the hassle of dressing a groggy and perhaps uncooperative child at 6am.

    As another poster has suggested, Patsy may have wanted JonBenet to be wearing that particular red turtleneck to meet the rels. We know Patsy and JonBenet fought about it before going to the Whites'. JonBenet won that one. (Maybe they fought about it again that evening.) If Patsy had a preconceived notion about what JonBenet was going to wear the next day, she might not be too thrilled if she soiled herself.
     
  6. Cottonstar

    Cottonstar Victimologist

    Messages:
    1,020
    Likes Received:
    1,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually, the ones she was found in were size small 6-8 boys.
     
  7. FY1234

    FY1234 Member

    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Would that mean they were too small for Burke then assuming he wore Medium for his age?
     
  8. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,760
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Cottonstar,
    Which is possibly consistent with Patsy's claims.


    .
     
  9. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,760
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    Trophy Points:
    113

    FY1234,
    Possibly not too small, just not long enough, he was Nine, so he is just one year out, unless the length is critical, he could get away with wearing them, say when playing baseball?

    .
     
  10. archieil

    archieil On Time Out

    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I think that "thermal product" is an important factor in this case.

    I would assume they were used as an additional clothing... no matter for Burke or for JonBenet. In both cases, they could be placed in her room. Burke was sleeping in her room from time to time and JonBenet was sometimes sleeping in his room.

    There is no Burke DNA on them so it should be assumed they were freshly washed.
     
  11. Cottonstar

    Cottonstar Victimologist

    Messages:
    1,020
    Likes Received:
    1,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Very good question. I’ll talk about it more in my blog next week.
     
  12. FY1234

    FY1234 Member

    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Where is your blog?
     
  13. Cottonstar

    Cottonstar Victimologist

    Messages:
    1,020
    Likes Received:
    1,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Juror13lw.com
     
  14. mickey2942

    mickey2942 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,429
    Likes Received:
    96,045
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fighting with a 6 year old? I really can't even imagine it. That was some strange dynamic. My kids didn't talk back or fight until 10, and they only did it once or twice.

    Why would a Mother be angry with a child who has an incontinence problem? At age 6, that happens sometimes. Especially if the child is stressed.

    Why would a stranger take JBR downstairs for molestation? If a stranger went to the effort of breaking in, he would have taken JBR out.
     
    fridaybaker and fcavanaugh like this.
  15. dcountmontecristo

    dcountmontecristo Free Thinker

    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    43
    but the test also mentioned that he cant be included... so how do you explain that?
     
  16. dcountmontecristo

    dcountmontecristo Free Thinker

    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    43
    what confuses me is for you to emphasize that he cant be excluded..what was written on the report... "Burke cant be included and excluded" and i believe that doesnt mean the same when you only emphasize on the latter.. regardless, it was not mentioned or not, the point is the dna evidence is just one part of the entire evidence in this case..without corroboration, the dna evidence still cant be used to clear them.. that's all
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2019
  17. dcountmontecristo

    dcountmontecristo Free Thinker

    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    43
    sorry but the exact words mentioned in the report =>" Burke cannot be included and excluded" .. i believe you cant interpret that statement with only focusing on one part because clearly they were used as one...
     
  18. David Rogers

    David Rogers Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    279
    Likes Received:
    481
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Maybe because he was under 10 they couldn’t include or exclude him.
     
  19. dcountmontecristo

    dcountmontecristo Free Thinker

    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    43
    if you are referring to the Colorado children's code of conviction, i dont think it was even relevant. why? because those were from a lab report from Bode. only a certified and trained dna analyst knows exactly what it really meant. my point was, it cannot be interpreted by just looking at it in a contextual manner. just sayin'
     
  20. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,760
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Burke cannot be included and excluded
    This is just typical legalese, over here politicians when they do not want to answer a question say I cannot confirm or deny, so its probable that they know but are under an injunction to keep it private?

    From memory these tests came long after those undertaken on the Barbie Nightgown where BR's touch-dna deposits slipped out.

    .
     

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