Nehemiah
Well-Known Member
kcksum said:\
I can not for the life of me understand why you think dna found in a drop of blood in the underpants of a victim who was sexully assaulted is not evidence in this crime. The only explanation can be that you just can't bear to see the evidence for what it is.
I can respect that. Some of you people have spent countless hours of your life focusing on the belief that the Ramsey's did this. Now that they have dna with 13 markers that excludes the family found in her blood, in her underwear, you have decided that itisn't a dna case. Tell me this......if a factory workers dna can be deposited so easily in a childs underwear, then the fibers of her parents clothing who held her, lived with her, bathed her and dressed her could very easily be deposited on her clothing and body with no problem. See.......we can twist and interpret the evidence in any way that fits our own assumptions.
If the FBI took the time and money to deposit that dna into codis it was not degraded.And those of you who keep saying that the Ramsey's are still the number one suspects.....WRONG!!!! You need to listen to the current DA, and the current POLICE CHEIF....they believe the evidence points to an intruder. We don't have to listen to the old opinions because their books and movie deals and so forth are over and done and they didn't solve the case. They are bitter, and of course will never believe anyone but the Ramsey's did this......as will many of you on these forums.
Regardless of anyone's personal thoughts here on the forum, Dr. Henry Lee said this would not be a DNA case and he said that from the beginning, before all this circus started. I certainly hope he is wrong, but he is an expert.