The DNA

[sissi]

USA Today..interesting DNA info

Aug. 17) - Police seeking the killer of an unidentified girl who was found decapitated in Kansas City, Mo., four years ago kept a secret from the public.

The child, dubbed "Precious Doe" by local residents, appeared to be black. But new DNA tests that can determine a person's heritage indicated she was of mixed ancestry - about 40% white. That meant she almost certainly had a white grandparent.

This year, a tip led police to an Oklahoma woman who had not reported her young daughter's disappearance. When the woman was found to have both a black and a white parent, police moved in. Further DNA tests determined that the woman, Michelle Johnson, was the girl's mother. Johnson and her husband, Harrell Johnson, the victim's stepfather, have been charged in the slaying.

Precious Doe was identified as 3-year-old Erica Michelle Marie Green of Muskogee, Okla. During a trip to Kansas City, prosecutors allege, her stepfather kicked her to death because she wouldn't go to bed on time.

In the past 12 years, police across the USA have identified thousands of suspects by testing DNA profiles in blood, sweat, semen or skin tissue left at crime scenes, and then comparing them to the profiles of known offenders on file in government databases. But as the Kansas City case showed, advances in DNA testing are allowing investigators to learn more about suspects whose profiles are not in the databases. Tests that can identify a suspect's ancestry are being used not to identify the suspect by name, but rather to give police an idea of what he or she looks like.


(I believe it's time for the BPD to put the Asian factory worker myth to rest!)

 

[Jayelles]

(There's a lot of nonsense being posted about DNA on another forum. LOL)

yesterday I learned something of interest about DNA.

The foreign DNA at the Ramsey crime scene was degraded. DNA can survive for centuries but it will degrade quickly under certain conditions - i.e. very high temperatures and exposure to certain chemicals.

What is meant by the term degraded? When DNA degrades, it fragments - breaks up. Imagine a jigsaw with some pieces still sticking together whilst others are jumbled up on their own or missing completely. If you gather all the pieces together and count them and there are only 300 pieces out of an original 500 - then you have an incomplete jigsaw. This is what happens when DNA degrades. We know that they have an incomplete sample of DNA. Initially there weren't enough markers to be useful, but later testing yieldedenough to meet the MINIMUM requirements (still not a complete sample though).

There is no evidence that JonBenet's body was exposed to a very high temperature OR that chemicals were poured on her body.

OK, so if DNA degrades over time - how could the DNA be the killers? Forensic testing began less than 24 hours after the murder - surely it should have been a complete sample if it was fresh from the killer?

Well there IS a way that the DNA could be degraded - and still be the killers because apparently, the DNA in scab tissue becomes degraded.

This still leaves qustions - namely, what is the likelihood of the killer shedding a cell or two - but only from a scab (which could have been a tiny cut).

 

[Eagle1]

I saw a program about crooks routinely planting DNA evidence, a couple of years ago or maybe farther back, probably ever since DNA became known. Since this was a mixture, more than one person's, might it sometimes get degraded by coming in contact with dry-cleaned clothing, or some chemical in the dark blue rag she was wiped with, or just the friction of the wiping?

The scab idea might be true, but has anyone ever seen a scab on hands or face? Where could it have been located, to come in contact with her panties? And I believe it was from more than one person, correct?

 

[Camper]

(There's a lot of nonsense being posted about DNA on another forum. LOL)

yesterday I learned something of interest about DNA.

The foreign DNA at the Ramsey crime scene was degraded. DNA can survive for centuries but it will degrade quickly under certain conditions - i.e. very high temperatures and exposure to certain chemicals.

What is meant by the term degraded? When DNA degrades, it fragments - breaks up. Imagine a jigsaw with some pieces still sticking together whilst others are jumbled up on their own or missing completely. If you gather all the pieces together and count them and there are only 300 pieces out of an original 500 - then you have an incomplete jigsaw. This is what happens when DNA degrades. We know that they have an incomplete sample of DNA. Initially there weren't enough markers to be useful, but later testing yieldedenough to meet the MINIMUM requirements (still not a complete sample though).

There is no evidence that JonBenet's body was exposed to a very high temperature OR that chemicals were poured on her body.

OK, so if DNA degrades over time - how could the DNA be the killers? Forensic testing began less than 24 hours after the murder - surely it should have been a complete sample if it was fresh from the killer?

Well there IS a way that the DNA could be degraded - and still be the killers because apparently, the DNA in scab tissue becomes degraded.

This still leaves qustions - namely, what is the likelihood of the killer shedding a cell or two - but only from a scab (which could have been a tiny cut).

---------->>>As I recall there was no cloth as such found with dark blue fibers, that might have been a candidate for being 'the' cleaning cloth.

Another thought - Some cleaning cloths that come in a package for specific cleaning chores, have chemicals in them already. Such as perhaps cloths for cleaning specific parts of a 'plane' or maybe 'a' car, or. I have not googled to see what might be available, that could perhaps point yet another finger at 'the' perp, or that might have been used for cleaning the home - 'an inside job' huh ? as JR pointed out.

.

.

 

[tipper]

(There's a lot of nonsense being posted about DNA on another forum. LOL)

yesterday I learned something of interest about DNA.

The foreign DNA at the Ramsey crime scene was degraded. DNA can survive for centuries but it will degrade quickly under certain conditions - i.e. very high temperatures and exposure to certain chemicals.

What is meant by the term degraded? When DNA degrades, it fragments - breaks up. Imagine a jigsaw with some pieces still sticking together whilst others are jumbled up on their own or missing completely. If you gather all the pieces together and count them and there are only 300 pieces out of an original 500 - then you have an incomplete jigsaw. This is what happens when DNA degrades. We know that they have an incomplete sample of DNA. Initially there weren't enough markers to be useful, but later testing yieldedenough to meet the MINIMUM requirements (still not a complete sample though).

There is no evidence that JonBenet's body was exposed to a very high temperature OR that chemicals were poured on her body.

OK, so if DNA degrades over time - how could the DNA be the killers? Forensic testing began less than 24 hours after the murder - surely it should have been a complete sample if it was fresh from the killer?

Well there IS a way that the DNA could be degraded - and still be the killers because apparently, the DNA in scab tissue becomes degraded.

This still leaves qustions - namely, what is the likelihood of the killer shedding a cell or two - but only from a scab (which could have been a tiny cut).

I thought this was interesting. Bigger is supposedly a hitman hired by Schwartz. He would only have been in the victim's (Stidham) car a short while and the murder was discovered relatively quickly. Yet the prosecution is saying he left only a partial profile.

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/schwartz/122882
Last week, Lorraine Heath and Curtis Reinbold, both criminalists with the Arizona Department of Public Safety, testified that the DNA tests they performed individually could not exclude Bigger as the person who left a partial DNA profile on Stidham's car radio knobs.

 

[Eagle1]

Right, no treated dark blue cleaning cloth was found, which might have suggested the wiper's occupation/"day job" when it wasn't Christmas Day. No package of similar cloths was found at the home, so it wasn't JR's, PROBABLY. Unless it was in his golf bag? What kind of perp would CARRY a cleaning cloth in his back pocket?

I have a question. Would mere friction of wiping the body degrade the DNA?
Anyone? Also just heard part of a forensics program stating that DNA examiners' own DNA can get mixed in! Maybe the coroner's too, especially if he's the one who undressed the body, or some of whoever did.

And of course, as someone suggested early on, her panties may have dragged against the front of the toilet seat, everywhere she toileted. That may well explain the presence of Barnhill's DNA.

 

[Eagle1]

People use various kinds of cleaners on their toilets. DNA deposited over a residue on the seat that wasn't rinsed well enough probably would become somewhat degraded, right?

 

[BOESP]

What do we know about it?

1) That there were at least three samples of foreign DNA found - in her underwear, under her fingernails and a third sample which is a secret and which is known as DNA-x.

2) That the DNA under her fingernails was very fragmented and yielded only 3/4 of the necessary 13 markers.

3) That the panty DNA was tested twice and that both samples were fragmented and did not yield the full 13 markers. The second sample yielded more than the first sample (perhaps due to improved testing techniques). The second sample yielded 9 good markers and a weaker, but just-useable 10th marker.

4) That DNA-x was not found on her body or her clothes.

5) That the people who have actual access to the lab results and testing of the DNA have made an official statement to say that the DNA may NOT be the killers and that it is so minute that it could have come from a cough or a sneeze during the manufacturing process. This statement was made after Ramsey supporters repeatedly claimed that the DNA was the killer's.

6) That the testing process for the panty-DNA would result in JonBenet's DNA and the foreign DNA being "co-mingled" but that this does NOT mean that they were deposited at the same time. One way of understanding this is to think of two solutions of water - one contains dissolved sugar, the other contains dissolved salt. Pour one solution onto a piece of fabric and let it dry. Take it to another State, wait a week and then pour the other solution on top and let it dry. Now soak the fabric in water and test the water. It will contain both salt AND sugar - but they were not deposited at the same time OR even in the same State. Ramsey supporters who claim that they had to be desposited at the same time are trying to pull the wool over people's eyes (either that or they genuinely "don't understand")

7) The foreign DNA is not Ramsey - or anyone else who has been tested.

8) If the foreign DNA is not the killer's then it means that none of the good suspects are indeed eliminated after all (but that means Ramsey too so their supporters cling to the notion that it is the killer's).

9) DNA fragments over time. Fresh DNA should not be fragmented - certainly not within a few hours. This is why the experts have described it as "old" DNA.

What else do we know?

I've tried to find mention of the third DNA sample Jayelles mentioned above (my boldface). Has the location of this DNA-x been released?

 

[coloradokares]

Sunlight melts snow? I am shocked. Shocked.

No But 51* will melt things down quickly and I Live here so ask if youd youd like as to what the snow was like. I remember that particular morning very well . There is no doubt in my mind that there would have been prints in the snow early am. If any had been left and none were found. Not by the first officers on the scene.

 

[coloradokares]

If you don't know when the light dusting took place, then you don't know if the weather was even a factor in IDI or RDI.

No but I do cause I live here and that was one of the first HEY why were there no footprints ? It made NO sense unless low flying hoovering UFS were somehow involved

 

[Nuisanceposter]

I've tried to find mention of the third DNA sample Jayelles mentioned above (my boldface). Has the location of this DNA-x been released?

DNA-X is discussed on this page a bit. Hope this helps...

http://www.acandyrose.com/s-evidence-DNA.htm

 

[BOESP]

DNA-X is discussed on this page a bit. Hope this helps...

http://www.acandyrose.com/s-evidence-DNA.htm

Thanks, NP. I assume the DNA-X came from one of the two hairs found in the blanket since I've also read that DNA-X was not found on JonBenet or her clothing, if I read correctly. Sounds to me like DNA-X is pretty useless because that hair could have come from anybody at any time, perhaps even being lodged in the dryer and getting on the blanket in that manner. No telling where it came from.

I've pretty much exhausted all the possibilities of anyone other than Patsy doing this. DNA-X was my last hope.

 

[DeeDee249]

It has been said before that DNA was never going to be a factor in solving this case. I guess that's been shown to be true so far.

 

[snowqueen]

No but I do cause I live here and that was one of the first HEY why were there no footprints ? It made NO sense unless low flying hoovering UFS were somehow involved

The amount of snow (dusting) at the Ramsey's house would not have necessarily been the same as you had at your house. imo

 

[Littledeer]

That would be true snowqueen. I live 4 miles from my mother's house, and I could have 3 or 4 inches at my house to her 1 or 2 inches at her house at the same downfall time, or vice versa.

 

[coloradokares]

The amount of snow (dusting) at the Ramsey's house would not have necessarily been the same as you had at your house. imo

You Forget we lived there!! I know it was basically the same. I also know how the day unfolded. We were glued to any news coming or being reported. You can believe that or not. Your choice

 

[Littledeer]

colorado:

So how much snow was on the ground around your home at the time you first looked outside? And how far away do you live from the R's home?

 

[coloradokares]

colorado:

So how much snow was on the ground around your home at the time you first looked outside? And how far away do you live from the R's home?

It was more than a slight dusting. It covered the lawns the bushs in front of the house. Sidewalks and drive. Enough so that there were tracks on the driveway clearly and there would have been foot prints , yet I suppose not enough to be measured in inches. I lived ....at that time about less than 15 miles over 2 miles Do you really think I care to give out my location?!?! Who all reads the forum besides those I would not care if they did know.Also my husband had been in the hospital so it was in and out back and forth ISo I can remember the roads as welll.