Dna -Merged-

[tybee204]

He has been under survielance in Thailand for a while. It seems to me if he were participating in the Child Sex Trade there they would have arrested him for that.

 

[Camper]

Just had a light bulb go on in my brain, listening to TV etc.

HE had been writing letters to PR before she died. My initial thought was 'did he type em or handwrite them', but the light bulb lit up when they said they would have already gotten his DNA from the envelope flap. SO, I am thinking it has been a match and that was why DA has already arrested him.

The excuses by the TH's parroting LE, for the quick arrest were, 1. He was a flight risk and 2. A danger risk for the small children he was teaching. Hmmm.

I am guessing they have a DNA match.

OOPS edited to add my new brain phart, could he have been acquainted with any of the CA guests at the White's party, that would have let him know about the party and the fact that the Ramseys would be attending it?

Sometimes an innocent comment to a friend or acquaintance can have a BIG rippling effect, ya think?

WAS he the fellow that Barnhill saw walking up to the R house Christmas Day? He is of slight build.

Also saw the psychics sketch of the 'murderer' early on in the case today. TV showed it side by side with Karr, quite an interesting similarity, thin face, nose very close, hair too.

Gave me shudders.

.
.

 

[michelle]

I am guessing they have a DNA match.

.

I pray they do.

 

[BBB167893]

michelle, we're all anxious.

"He did also say because the dna wasn't complete and possibly a bit degraded, the odds of a match will be less compelling than if the dna was fresh, etc."

Right.

"I ,dunno ,PH- Have you read here much over the years? There's some dead set on Patsy's guilt- not sure they would change their minds; no matter the evidence."

Maybe so, but I will eat my words.

"Strictly speaking it could be him even if DNA doesn't match.
I don't think it is the killers DNA they got on the panties and the fingernails."

Yeah. The forensic scientists think it was just a contaminant. But it doesn't mean he didn't do it. Conversely, it doesn't mean Patsy and/or John didn't either. Let's keep open on this.

 

[Bev]

had one single item of evidence linking this guy to the crime, she would have said so. When's the last time we heard any DA in a big case like this caution the press that the person they've arrested might be innocent? That would tell any sentient person that the DA doesn't believe in his/her own case. Can you imagine a defense attorney showing that pr stunt in the courtroom and telling the jury that the DA had doubts herself?

 

[BBB167893]

Bev, you said a mouthfull!

 

[Buzz Mills]

It seems that a mitochondrial DNA test would already be complete, and either include, or exclude, John Mark Karr.

 

[LaMer]

They had ample time to collect a fresh sample from JK, using covert methods. Mark Spray, one of Lacy's investigators was on the scene a week ago.


Excerpt:

The Roswell, Ga., Police Department was credited by Lacy for its role in bringing about Karr's arrest, but officials there declined to say what exactly they did.

"We assisted in locating the suspect in Thailand," Roswell Police Chief Edwin Williams said in a phone interview. "We provided technical expertise to the extent that they (Boulder investigators) asked."

On Aug. 7, Lacy decided the time had come to dispatch one of her investigators, Mark Spray, to Bangkok. He left town on four hours' notice.



http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4926204,00.html

 

[PagingDrDetect]

Originally Posted by gaia
Dna was probably collected from Karr when he was in trouble all those years ago and skipped town in Petaluma. I think they illegally and surreptitiously obtained it and made the match, then decided to go ahead and get this guy - because the Thais were going to cut him loose and kick him out of their country.

If LE already had a DNA profile of Karr, why would they need to obtain another sample from him in Tailand to match it to? If they already had his DNA profile on file, that's all they need, and they could just go ahead and try to match it to whatever DNA evidence from the crime scene they have. The fact that they took a DNA sample from him in Tailand would indicate they they probably don't have his DNA profile already, but if they did, they may have also taken the additional sample in Tailand just to be incredibly thorough.

Illegally obtaining a DNA sample is just not a possibility. The LE would have to have gone through a private DNA testing firm to have an illegally obtained sample tested as the State Bureau of Investigation wouldn't touch it, nor would LE be stupid enough to try. The SBI requires significant chain of custody as well as a judge's order allowing the testing... chain of custody includes how the sample was obtained. A private DNA testing firm is grossly expensive, the LE would have to figure out some way of hiding the payment for their service, and anyone from LE who signed a contract with the private firm and received the bill would put themselves at risk for not only losing their job and entire career but risk criminal prosecution as well. DNA testing just isn't something that can be done furtively in some back room of the police department.

Besides, why would they bother illegally obtaining a DNA sample from Karr in Tailand since they wouldn't be able to use that information to convince a judge or the Taiwanese to arrest or extradite him? LE can't just decide to arrest this guy on their own... probable cause has to be shown to a judge first, and the judge decides if the person can be arrested. They couldn't and certainly wouldn't take illegally obtained DNA evidence to a judge to show probable cause. There is just no reason to illegally obtain DNA from Karr since they can't use it for anything. The Taiwanese would be even more scrupulous in making sure that the DNA was obtained legally as they want to wash their hands of this guy without anyone being able to point fingers at them later.

Surreptuously obtaining a sample of Karr's DNA would be a possibility, and I don't see much reason why they would not be able to go through legal channels to obtain one. All that would be needed is to show the judge that there is probable cause he's the perp and sufficient reason why arresting him before DNA testing was completed without his knowledge would present difficulties (although I don't know what difficulties there would be)... there's probable cause as Karr was already a suspect, and he was previously arrested for child *advertiser censored*. I'm just not seeing the reason why they couldn't just go ahead and arrest him in Tailand because of the outstanding warrant from skipping the country on the *advertiser censored* case. However, it may be that convincing Tailand officials to arrest him just on the outstanding warrant may not have been sufficient for the Taiwanese. The U.S. has an extradition treaty with Taiwan, but who knows what sort of information/evidence the Taiwanese may require before allowing Karr to be extradited.

Obtaining a surreptuous DNA sample would also be quite tricky... the sample would have to be known to come from him, and known to be uncontaminated. It may be possible for someone tailing him to cleverly lift a soda bottle he was seen drinking out of or a cigarette butt from a cigarette he smoked, but it would be extremely difficult to do that without that sample becoming contaminated. If someone tailing him watched him drink from a can of soda, Karr threw the can in the trash, and the person tailing him retrieved it from the trash, it would then be contaminated by the contents of whatever else was in the trash. Same thing if someone tailing him lifted a cigarette butt he tossed away.

 

[PagingDrDetect]

Originally Posted by dragonfly707
I read a news story today that LE gained enterance into a former residence here in Sonoma County after Karr left it. Surely at that time they would have been able to gain some DNA evidence to do a comparison.

They may have been able to obtain DNA, but how would they know whose it was? The only way they would know whose DNA sample they intended to test is if they were certain that it came from him. There's probably DNA all over my house from people that aren't me... guests that have been here, the owners, the people that used to live here and their guests... the list is endless. It would also have to be uncontaminated... they would have to know that the sample they tested did not in any way come into contact with anyone else's DNA (and there is just no possibility of that by sampling anything in the house where he used to live).

Originally Posted by Peter Hamilton
Anniegirl,you couldn't be more wrong--DNA evidence is absolute--I have believed that the Ramseys were guilty from day one,but if Karr's DNA is there,then its case closed and Karr did it--there won't be anybody still believing the Ramsey's are guilty if Karr's DNA shows up

DNA evidence certainly isn't absolute... after all, OJ never went to jail on DNA evidence. It also isn't absolute if it isn't a positive match or can be reasonably shown to be contaminated. A positive DNA goes a long way in making a perp guilty in a court of law, but it's never an absolute.

Also, if Karr is found to be the murderer, it doesn't clear one or both of the Ramsey's of participating or covering up for him. Obviously, no one is going to bother to investigate if Patsy had anything to do with Karr murdering JBR because Patsy is dead now. However, that wouldn't clear John. Personally, I don't believe the LE will look for a connection of John to the murder unless Karr implicates him. After all these years, they'd be happy to just stick it to Karr and wash their hands of this case.

Originally Posted by Camper
HE had been writing letters to PR before she died. My initial thought was 'did he type em or handwrite them', but the light bulb lit up when they said they would have already gotten his DNA from the envelope flap. SO, I am thinking it has been a match and that was why DA has already arrested him.

Do we know for certain the letters he sent to PR were physical letters and not sent to her electronically? As far as I can tell, his correspondence to PR was through email, and it is still not known if that correspondence originated from him. HE says he sent her letters. This doesn't mean he did or that they were physical letters.

Also, physical letters sent for testing for DNA from the envelope would be pointless as by the time they arrived to PR they would have been contaminated... just his putting them in a mailbox would contaminate them. A DNA sample in order to be relevant has to be uncontaminated and known to come from the perp. As an example, if they wanted a DNA sample from me, it would be pointless to test a sample of one of my bathroom towels as plenty of other people's DNA may have gotten on that towel. If they already HAD a positive profile of my DNA, then they could try to match it to a sample found on my bathroom towel.

Originally Posted by gaia
He did also say because the dna wasn't complete and possibly a bit degraded, the odds of a match will be less compelling than if the dna was fresh, etc.

If the DNA sample they have from the crime scene evidence is only a partial, they will definitely need some other type of evidence... proof of his presense in the area at the time at least.

Originally Posted by michelle
He is so weird looking, very sickly too.

Opium addict. That's the first thing I thought when I saw him.

 

[Camper]

As I have posted earlier on another thread, IF IF Karr has been sending letters left right and center to PR at least two months ago, his DNA would be on the envelope flaps, right?

SO that being so, IF I am correct, there was ample time to cross match the DNA they had from the crime scene to his DNA on the envelopes.

IF IF they indeed matched, then it is my belief that was WHEN they dispatched LE to Thailand.

Colorado Bureau of Investigation does these tests as well.
So a probable cause court order was most likely issued and the tests done.

Correct me if I have erred.

=======================Edited

I see DrDetect and I posted at the same time. I will revise my thought here on the DNA, perhaps in fact DNA might have been compromised from the envelope flap, BUT fingerprints could have been lifted from the letters, and compared to data bank from his arrest on child *advertiser censored* issues in CA. I am not certain whether a DNA is taken from such an arrest in CA, huh? IF IF so, then the comparison to the crime scene DNA could have been done at least two months ago, huh ?, er?

.

 

[tri2005]

it is my understanding that the dna from jonbenet is not complete..instead of having 13 markers they have like 8 or 9.

i think if they can match say 8 or 9 ...its more like 1in 100k instead of the 1 in 999 million. (the numbers are made up but you get the point)

if they got his dna from an envelope they can compare it to anything they want.

if they have his permisive dna in the data banks then they need probable cause to test it to a certain crime.

this guy is like the bratz doll boogey man with the overly large head and eye looking makeup.

thanks for the welcome camper.
:twocents:
tri

 

[Camper]

it is my understanding that the dna from jonbenet is not complete..instead of having 13 markers they have like 8 or 9.

i think if they can match say 8 or 9 ...its more like 1in 100k instead of the 1 in 999 million. (the numbers are made up but you get the point)

if they got his dna from an envelope they can compare it to anything they want.

if they have his permisive dna in the data banks then they need probable cause to test it to a certain crime.

this guy is like the bratz doll boogey man with the overly large head and eye looking makeup.

thanks for the welcome camper.
:twocents:
tri

--->>>WE have been told by experts like Dr. Henry Lee that there are 11 markers in the crime scene dna.

We are also being told that the technology has been greatly improved in the last 10 years.

Probable cause could most likely have been the 'beans' in the 'letters' that Karr was spilling about the crime.

.

 

[PagingDrDetect]

As a side note, if anyone is interested, this site about DNA testing is very informative, but is a bit difficult to absorb (at least it was for me!)...
http://www.scientific.org/tutorials...iley/riley.html

From that site, this is an interesting bit about partials...

Partial Profiles

Use of "partial profiles" is a newly emerging and fairly disturbing trend. A partial profile is one in which not all of the loci targeted show up in the sample. For example, if 13 loci were targeted, and only 9 could be reported, that would be termed, a partial profile. Failure of all targeted loci to show up demonstrates a serious deficiency in the sample. Normally, all human cells (except red blood cells and cells called "platelets") have all 13 loci. Therefore, a partial profile represents the equivalent of less than a single human cell. This presents some important problems:

1. A partial profile essentially proves that one is operating outside of well-characterized and recommended limits.

2. Contaminating DNA usually presents as a partial profile, although not always. For this reason, the risk that the result is a contaminant is greater than for samples that present as full profiles.

3. A partial profile is at risk of being incomplete and misleading. The partial nature of it proves that DNA molecules have been missed. There is no way of firmly determining what the complete profile would have been, except by seeking other samples that may present a full profile.

Most forensic laboratories will try to obtain full profiles. Unfortunately, in an important case, it may be tempting to use a partial profile, especially if that is all that one has. However, such profiles should be viewed skeptically. Over-interpretation of partial profiles can probably lead to serious mistakes. Such mistakes could include false inclusions and false exclusions, alike. It could be said that, compared to the first PCR-based tests introduced into the courts, use of partial profiles represents a decline in standards. This is because those earlier tests, while less discriminating, had controls (known as "control dots") that helped prevent the use of partial profiles. The earlier tests will be discussed below, primarily for historic reasons, but also because they do still appear on occasion.

Woooo... slogging through all that info makes my brain hurt! Anyone gotta monster sized aspirin? (Like big enough that I'd need utensils to ingest it?)

 

[BBB167893]

I already took all of the aspirin, doc!

"WE have been told by experts like Dr. Henry Lee that there are 11 markers in the crime scene dna."

It was 10, actually.

"We are also being told that the technology has been greatly improved in the last 10 years."

Right! The DNA itself is not improved, the technology has improved.

"Probable cause could most likely have been the 'beans' in the 'letters' that Karr was spilling about the crime."

Remember: probable cause and beyond reasonable doubt are worlds apart.

Thanks for that info, doc! Some of us have said that for years!

 

[JBean]

They just outlined the DNA matching. It takes 3 to 4 days.If the cheek swab matches the DNA from the blood on JB's underwear, there is a 1 in 3 TRILLION chance that it would be a mistake.

 

[Buzz Mills]

They just outlined the DNA matching. It takes 3 to 4 days.If the cheek swab matches the DNA from the blood on JB's underwear, there is a 1 in 3 TRILLION chance that it would be a mistake.

That should just about cover the universe JBean. I was hoping that they would do a mitochondrial DNA to tell us if they were on the right track at least.

 

[BBB167893]

"They just outlined the DNA matching. It takes 3 to 4 days.If the cheek swab matches the DNA from the blood on JB's underwear, there is a 1 in 3 TRILLION chance that it would be a mistake."

It would be an end-game, wouldn't it? I guess we have to wait.

 

[PagingDrDetect]

Originally Posted by Camper
I see DrDetect and I posted at the same time. I will revise my thought here on the DNA, perhaps in fact DNA might have been compromised from the envelope flap, BUT fingerprints could have been lifted from the letters, and compared to data bank from his arrest on child *advertiser censored* issues in CA. I am not certain whether a DNA is taken from such an arrest in CA, huh? IF IF so, then the comparison to the crime scene DNA could have been done at least two months ago, huh ?, er?

Funny you should mention fingerprints because I almost included something about that in this thread as well but when I noticed how long-winded I had already gotten, I thought it best I save that for later. So, here's what I'm thinking about fingerprints...

Karr's fingerprints would have been on file since he was arrested on that *advertiser censored* charge previously. Anyone who gets arrested is fingerprinted. LE may have found a match from fingerprints found at the crime scene, and that may be a big reason why they wanted to nab him in Tailand. However, that was something they should have done years ago, so I just can't account for them suddenly having found a fingerprint match... unless of course, they got lazy about looking into that since they had always been so focused on the Ramsey's.

Also, we still don't know what connection Karr has to the Ramsey's. It's been reported over and over that it was the Ramsey's themselves who gave Karr's identity to LE as a possible suspect, and we also know that at some point in the past LE searched the house where he used to live (although I don't know if that was years ago or more recently). If there was a connection between Karr and the Ramsey's that made it reasonable that he could have been in their house as a guest, finding his fingerprints there may not mean much of anything... unless they were found somewhere significant like close to where the body was found or around the window where he allegedly may have entered the house.

I'm still not seeing any indication that whatever letters he allegedly sent to PR were physical letters rather than electronic ones, or that it is certain it was Karr himself that would have sent any physical letters. If he did send physical letters to PR, would he be so stupid as to let his fingerprints get on them? Apparently, he was very careful of email corresponding with Tracey by going through a server nowhere near his physical location, so would he be so careless as to allow his fingerprints to get on a physical letter?

Apparently, these letters to PR were routed to LE without Karr's knowledge... that would be difficult to do if it was a physical location. Personally, I'm really quite sure that these letters Karr sent to PR were not physical letters but emails. I really wish someone would publically clarify that. BUT, if it was definitely Karr who sent physical letters to PR that LE intercepted, and he was stupid enough to get his fingerprints on them, that would prove... well, it would prove that Karr sent a physical letter to PR that says something we don't know. If he said in the letters that he was the murderer of JBR, then it would be pretty darn good probable cause to go nab him. However, his being a known suspect in the case already and being arrested for child *advertiser censored* that he fled the country before going to trial should have been probable cause enough.

Actually, it's rather academic at this point since he confessed after being arrested... that's plenty good enough reason to extradite him and collect a big giant wad of his spit for DNA testing.

I don't know whether or not Karr's *advertiser censored* arrest would have included a DNA sample. Since it was CA (and CA over most any state is generally more stringent about civil rignts protection), I don't think it's terribly likely that Karr's DNA sample would be taken as a matter of course for a *advertiser censored* charge especially when it was a first offense. I also have doubts that his DNA would be on file for that charge without LE having attempted to match his profile to whatever DNA evidence they have long ago... after all, he was arrested for that charge in 2001 I believe it was. Since he was already a known suspect at that time, why would they have not tried to match his profile to their DNA evidence back then? But it could be that they didn't because of sloppy investigation practices (Lord knows, they botched up this case like crazy for years and years).

This is an interesting article that goes into the need for state laws requiring DNA testing for arrested persons, not just convicted ones for the obvious reason that if LE had access to that information, a suspect who may have committed another crime be more easily and more quickly identified...

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1052440832766
...
"All 50 states have enacted laws to force the collection of DNA samples from inmates convicted of sex crimes."
...
"Proponents of the idea say the identification and arrest of Lee will help persuade lawmakers in other states for the need to start collecting DNA at the time of arrest. Had an "arrestee testing" law been in place 10 years ago, Lee might have been caught quickly. He has a long list of peeping Tom, stalking and battery arrests."
...

According to that article, all 50 states have laws forcing DNA testing of CONVICTED sex criminals, but not ARRESTED sex criminals. As we know, Karr was arrested for the *advertiser censored* charge, but he skipped the country before he could have been convicted. In this case, it certainly would have been convenient if there was a law in place requiring the collection of DNA from those arrested for sex crimes, not just convicted for them. After reading this article, I have really big doubts that Karr's DNA would have been collected at the time of his *advertiser censored* arrest.

Originally Posted by Camper
Thanks for that info, doc! Some of us have said that for years!

My pleasure. Glad you found it worthwhile.

 

[BBB167893]

Doc, I just caught Carlton Smith on O'Reilly. He said that, number one, no reliable source has matched the DNA under her nails to her underwear, and two, we DON'T know even if it was deposited that night! Which is what a lot of investigators said!