The Ramseys are Cleared

[Spazkat9696]

Just because the dna does not match any of the Ramsey family does not mean that they are innocent in the murder of JBR. The dna found could have been on the undies prior to JBR ever wearing them. To announce that the Ramseys are "cleared" implies, at the very least, that they are innocent, which I will never believe.

They found DNA in skin cells on the waist band of her tights which were removed and then put back on that matches the DNA in the underwear.

 

[MrsMush99]

But they said that there is matching DNA on her leggings also. That couldn't have came from the panty manufacturer.

Agreed.

 

[MrsMush99]

I would like to know why they haven't find this DNA evidence until now?

 

[becklynn]

They found DNA in skin cells on the waist band of her tights which were removed and then put back on that matches the DNA in the underwear.

I haven't heard that yet. Just heard it was dna from underwear. Fox website headline says "May" clear the Ramseys. Not "does" clear the Ramseys. I'm gonna wait a little while to see how this goes before I open my big mouth again. Honestly I hope this is a new lead.

 

[Peculiar Petunia]

I wish the local radio station I listen to would carry the entire program I heard the Ramsey teaser on.

 

[Ciara]

Wow...I used to originally believe they were innocent and then I wavered after reading everything and sometimes believed they were guilty, then more guilty than innocent.
Imagine if they really are innocent. The agony of knowing people thought u were guilty and all the things that were said about them

I still dont know yet. How strong is this DNA in the grand scheme of things if it was on her clothes before she even wore them? If it was semen then that would be everything.....
I still just dont know

 

[MrsMush99]

Ok, I haven't followed this case very closely through the years. But to those who have always felt the Ramseys were responsible. Wouldn't this change your mind?

I mean, they're saying the DNA on the leggings matches what was found in the underwear, and that DNA doesn't match anyone in the Ramsey family.

IMO, it appears the Ramseys are innocent.

Just wondering,
fran

It might Fran. But I don't think so. I never believed they did it. I've seen too many cases where people come in and abduct/murder children and there is no evidence of them being in the house. Two come to mind, Elizabeth Smart and Danielle VanDam.

 

[unjaded]

MSNBC is doing a full story on it now, with details and interviews.

 

[MrsMush99]

I haven't heard that yet. Just heard it was dna from underwear. Fox website headline says "May" clear the Ramseys. Not "does" clear the Ramseys. I'm gonna wait a little while to see how this goes before I open my big mouth again. Honestly I hope this is a new lead.

The DNA they tested was on her tights. It MATCHED the DNA that was on her underwear.

 

[Rino]

Source

 

[Spazkat9696]

I would like to know why they haven't find this DNA evidence until now?

Advances in DNA technology allowed the new evidence to be found. When this first happened the technology did not yet exist. They said the testing was done at a lab in Virginia.

 

[MrsMush99]

MSNBC is doing a full story on it now, with details and interviews.

Darn, I don't have MSNBC.

 

[fran]

I would like to know why they haven't find this DNA evidence until now?

Detecting DNA evidence was still relatively new when this crime occurred. It's easy for them to have missed it and come back later and find it.

That happened during the Runnion case. Two different chemists had inspected the vehicle and it wasn't until a third person received the item that DNA evidence was found from a tear. I don't think they had been looking for that type at the time.

I honestly can see it being missed previously.

JMHO
fran

 

[MrsMush99]

Advances in DNA technology allowed the new evidence to be found. When this first happened the technology did not yet exist. They said the testing was done at a lab in Virginia.

Oh thank you.

 

[MrsMush99]

Detecting DNA evidence was still relatively new when this crime occurred. It's easy for them to have missed it and come back later and find it.

That happened during the Runnion case. Two different chemists had inspected the vehicle and it wasn't until a third person received the item that DNA evidence was found from a tear. I don't think they had been looking for that type at the time.

I honestly can see it being missed previously.

JMHO
fran

Yes you are right Fran. Sometimes my emotions get the best of me, and I don't realize that we weren't has advanced in our DNA testing back then as we are now.

 

[becklynn]

Source

Wow! I never thought we'd get new info on this case. I need to rethink everything now.

 

[MrsMush99]

Now they are saying that they RETESTED the panties DNA. Where did the tights come from??? I could have sworn I heard tights, not just here but on the news.

 

[fran]

FWIW, my daughter is a forensic chemist. Although this isn't exactly the type of evidence she analyzes, I know mistakes can be made, no matter what lab it's in.

On Fox right now they said they used a different type of testing and determined it's male DNA etc.

So see, it was a NEW method used.

JMHO
fran

 

[MrsMush99]

FWIW, my daughter is a forensic chemist. Although this isn't exactly the type of evidence she analyzes, I know mistakes can be made, no matter what lab it's in.

On Fox right now they said they used a different type of testing and determined it's male DNA etc.

So see, it was a NEW method used.

JMHO
fran

Thank you fran. :blowkiss:

 

[Ciara]

On Fox here they are saying its some kind of new Touch technology, when someone touches something (in this case her clothes) that they are able to lift DNA from that and that it matches the DNA that was taken in 1997