A DNA expert will be available to answer your questions!

[icedtea4me]

This idea of innocent transfer is more complicated than it seems at first glance.

Consider: jbr transfers this DNA. She touches an object and transfers a stranger’s DNA to her hands. Now, she touches her leggings and transfers that DNA (but, not her own) to them. But, she wasn’t wearing the leggings until after she was put to bed (or, at least, until after she went upstairs upon arriving home from the White’s). If she touches anything between the time of picking up this stranger’s DNA and touching her leggings, then the stranger’s DNA is going to transfer to that something instead.

This is true if the DNA is transferred by Mrs Ramsey. She would have to transfer the stranger’s DNA to herself, and then to the leggings. If she touches something in between – for example, the pants she removed from jbr – the stranger’s DNA should have transferred to that.

Every innocent theory of transfer is NECESSARILY more complex than a theory of primary transfer by her killer (because primary transfer is always the likeliest mechanism of transfer). And, all this only concerns the tDNA (skin cells; dry) found on the leggings. Now, factor in the non-tDNA DNA (saliva: wet) inside the panties and you’re already complex theory of innocent transfer becomes even more complex.
…

AK

What if the skin cells had come from saliva that had dried?

http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682463/DNA Evidence

I don't see Mr Brown, Cliff Gaston, and Bill Cox as having provided a DNA sample. They were all present at both the Ramseys' party on 23 Dec and the Whites' party on 25 Dec. What if one of them had coughed or spit into a cloth at the Ramseys' and that same cloth was used to wipe JonBenet down? What if the same person had his old DNA on his coat at the Whites' party and JonBenet handled that coat?

 

[lawstudent]

You may be right but may be wrong too. All of the documents were not released from the GJ. And there are key bits of information that can be learned from both JBR and BR medical records. JR and PR wanted them held "for an island of privacy." They may contain key information. On 12/17 PR called JBR's pediatrician 3 times- nothing is known about why. If those medical docs can be obtained and sealed- it could reveal some interesting nuggets of information.
Not to mention BR's medical records and f/u with his psychiatrist.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Obviously I have no way of knowing, but if we assume there was family involvement, the only person who could be prosecuted would be John, and with Patsy dead I think building a case would be extremely difficult after all this time. The records could show something was off, but not what actually happened, and it would be very easy to point the finger elsewhere.

 

[UKGuy]

The size 12's are absurdly out sized on JB. I find it extremely improbable that she put them on herself.Since PR admitted they were hers, that excludes an intruder bringing them. Have you seen the FFJ thread where Jayelles made a plaster cast of her own daughter? She was the exact same height and like one pound difference in weight. The panties hang to the knees. They would provide no coverage whatsoever, and would be extremely uncomfortable to wear. There is a huge difference in size, its not as little as PR tries to state.

Annapurna,
Also PR claimed to be unaware that JonBenet was wearing size-12's until The National Enquirer published the information days before she was due to be interviewed on the subject.

Matching Wednesday day-of-the-week underwear might have been important to PR, but not at the expense of consistency, there would have been nothing to prevent PR fetching another pair of size-6 underwear whenever she sourced the white long-johns assuming her version of events is factual?

Looks more likely that either JR of BR redressed JonBenet in those size-12's?

.

 

[Annapurna]

Good points UKguy.

I've brought up the same question: why not just get a new pair of underwear from upstairs? Was it important that they were new? Was it important that they were not stained? Was it the day of the week that was important?

It seems much more likely to me that JR put them on her. I can't see BR thinking of doing that. I see it as more likely that JR was involved in the "dirty work" of the staging. The hard parts that PR couldn't handle. I think she was writing the note (and practicing to get it right) while JR was cleaning up, and perhaps using the cord (I just can't see that as staging though, it's too far.)
In a BDI scenario, I think that she was found by PR in a horrible state. Probably with the cord already around her neck and bloodied legs, in a state of undress, already dead. She cannot allow the world to know her golden child was killed by her firstborn. She wants to hide it so she can deny it ever happened. JR goes along, perhaps not agreeing with all of her ideas, which might explain some of the conflicting evidence and the tension between them that morning. He probably didn't think it would work. They were lucky though, it did the job. I don't think it was just for appearance. I think cleaning it up, hiding it allowed them to dismiss and forgive the event in their own minds.

 

[UKGuy]

Good points UKguy.

I've brought up the same question: why not just get a new pair of underwear from upstairs? Was it important that they were new? Was it important that they were not stained? Was it the day of the week that was important?

It seems much more likely to me that JR put them on her. I can't see BR thinking of doing that. I see it as more likely that JR was involved in the "dirty work" of the staging. The hard parts that PR couldn't handle. I think she was writing the note (and practicing to get it right) while JR was cleaning up, and perhaps using the cord (I just can't see that as staging though, it's too far.)
In a BDI scenario, I think that she was found by PR in a horrible state. Probably with the cord already around her neck and bloodied legs, in a state of undress, already dead. She cannot allow the world to know her golden child was killed by her firstborn. She wants to hide it so she can deny it ever happened. JR goes along, perhaps not agreeing with all of her ideas, which might explain some of the conflicting evidence and the tension between them that morning. He probably didn't think it would work. They were lucky though, it did the job. I don't think it was just for appearance. I think cleaning it up, hiding it allowed them to dismiss and forgive the event in their own minds.

Annapurna,
Yes it could have transpired as you suggest. I favor a BDI, with BR doing some initial staging then JR restaging to avoid instant arrest.

The forensic evidence leans towards PR asphyxiating JonBenet, i.e. fibers etc, but it could as easly be JR who applied the ligature?

.

 

[BBB167893]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touch_DNA

Touch DNA analysis only requires seven or eight cells from the outermost layer of human skin.[SUP][2][/SUP] The technique has been criticized for high rates of false positives due to contamination — for example, fingerprint brushes used by crime scene investigators can transfer trace amounts of skin cells from one surface to another, leading to inaccurate results.[SUP][3][/SUP][SUP][4][/SUP] Because of the risk of false positives, it is more often used by the defense to help exclude a suspect rather than the prosecution.[SUP][5][/SUP]

The technique is very similar to Low Copy Number DNA analysis, to the extent that court rulings have sometimes confused the two.[SUP][6][/SUP] In LCN DNA analysis, the DNA goes through additional cycles of PCR amplification.[SUP][6][/SUP]

Bolded by me. Sometimes I wonder if that was the intent.

 

[BBB167893]

I get the feeling that Alex Hunter intentionally buried the case because he felt that he was legally outmatched and would never stand a chance of winning without a confession. Every other DA that came after him had to deal with the fallout, so Lacey tried to put an end to it. The people of Boulder should should petition to have that case reopened and investigate to it fullest extent, not just the crime itself but the actions of the people that purposely sabotaged the case.

I've been saying that for years. If I were a special prosecutor, I'd call a new grand jury to investigate the DA's office, the Haddon Law Firm and Lin Wood, among others. I'd put 'em through the ringer. And, boy, what would squeeze out...

 

[Tadpole12]

Bolded by me. Sometimes I wonder if that was the intent.

Err, how could it not be, SD?

 

[Tadpole12]

IMO The merit of 'touch dna' is under constant scrutiny.


http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...10/151028133944.htm+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca

Study raises questions about DNA evidence

Date:October 28, 2015
Source:University of Indianapolis

"Secondary transfer of human DNA through intermediary contact is far more common than previously thought, a finding that could have serious repercussions for medical science and the criminal justice system, report investigators."

 

[icedtea4me]

Was there any t-DNA found on the underwear?

 

[kimi_SFC]

IMO The merit of 'touch dna' is under constant scrutiny.


http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...10/151028133944.htm+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca

Study raises questions about DNA evidence

Date:October 28, 2015
Source:University of Indianapolis

"Secondary transfer of human DNA through intermediary contact is far more common than previously thought, a finding that could have serious repercussions for medical science and the criminal justice system, report investigators."

Excellent read. :gthanks:

I found the full article here:


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151028133944.htm#




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jolamom]

With the DNA evidence in CODIS being only 10 markers, with a hit, roughly what would that person's odds be against the general population? I understand it would not be legally significant, I am just curious.