BPD and DA put a lot of effort into tracing this DNA to an innocent source. None was found. They might have missed something, but if they did it would almost have to be something unlikely.
Why did JBRs panties have ten to 12 times the amount of DNA than was found on the new panties purchased and tested by investigators? Why is the DNA commingled with the victims blood? Why is it on the INSIDE of the panties? It is said to probably be saliva. There is matching tDNA on the OUTSIDE of the leggings that is said to probably be from skin cells.
How does DNA ten to 12 times the amount known to be on new panties, commingled in blood, probably saliva, inside and in the crotch of panties turn into probably skin cells and make its way to the outside of the leggings? The tDNA on the leggings makes the factory worker theory obsolete, or at least, incredibly unlikely.
Plus, we need to consider that the victim was wearing these two articles of clothing (one inside the other) at the same time. How likely is it that she would have the same male (innocent) strangers DNA on her leggings and panties if they were transferred on separate occasions (when she wasnt wearing them together, or at all)?
Unlikely x unlikely x unlikely x unlikely, etc becomes a lot of unlikely.
If we consider the DNA alone, then an explanation of primary transfer by the killer during the commission of his crime becomes a very simple explanation. DNA alone, it becomes a likely explanation (because primary transfer is ALWAYS the likeliest method of transfer). In a contest between likely and unlikely x unlikely x unlikely x unlikely, etc, likely always wins.
There is just no easy way to dismiss the likeliest explanation. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and the claim that the DNA
...
AK
Anti-K,
All your tDNA and DNA references can be explained away as secondary transfer. In fact, it makes it the most probable explanation, since there is no other matching dna found at the crime-scene!
The secondary transfer most likely occurred when JonBenet was redressed in the size-12's. The unwrapping of the size-12's would constitute a secondary source moment, since the Ramsey's had the size-12's gift wrapped by some third party and delivered to their house.
JR by picking up JonBenet in the wine-cellar likely transferred his tDNA onto her longjohns, similarly Patsy when she allegedly dressed JonBenet in them, so BR's tDNA should really not appear inside either the longjohns, or the size-12's, since we know both were fresh on her. So why has BPD not itemised all the DNA identified, I reckon I know why?
Whilst there are credible explanations of secondary transfer your IDI theory will never fly, particularly we now know the parents were facing charges of colluding in a homicide!
.