Dna -Merged-

[TexMex]

The DNA, from what I understand was good enough to be entered into CODIS--someone said the minimum for that is 10 markers. So it is good enough to convict.

Hi Buzz

After a murder investigation that went nowhere, the answer to the question, "Who killed JonBenet," is likely in the Denver police department crime lab.

"I believe the technology of today makes it extraordinarily difficult for a killer not to leave his calling card," says police forensic specialist Greg LaBerge, referring to the suspect's complete DNA profile.

He believes he has the DNA for the man he suspects is the killer of JonBenet Ramsey: "It would be very, very helpful to the investigation to have that DNA matched to an individual."

The crime lab has two spots of JonBenet's blood found on the underwear she was wearing the night of the murder. Mixed in with that blood is the DNA of an unknown person. It has taken years to isolate, but forensic scientists in Colorado now have a complete DNA profile of the killer. They know the killer is a male. What they don't know is his name.

Augustin and Gray are convinced that the DNA sample belongs to JonBenet's killer, because of a small amount of matching DNA that also was found under the 6-year-old murder victim's fingernails.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/16/48hours/main661569.shtml

 

[Buzz Mills]

Hi Buzz

After a murder investigation that went nowhere, the answer to the question, "Who killed JonBenet," is likely in the Denver police department crime lab.

"I believe the technology of today makes it extraordinarily difficult for a killer not to leave his calling card," says police forensic specialist Greg LaBerge, referring to the suspect's complete DNA profile.

He believes he has the DNA for the man he suspects is the killer of JonBenet Ramsey: "It would be very, very helpful to the investigation to have that DNA matched to an individual."

The crime lab has two spots of JonBenet's blood found on the underwear she was wearing the night of the murder. Mixed in with that blood is the DNA of an unknown person. It has taken years to isolate, but forensic scientists in Colorado now have a complete DNA profile of the killer. They know the killer is a male. What they don't know is his name.

Augustin and Gray are convinced that the DNA sample belongs to JonBenet's killer, because of a small amount of matching DNA that also was found under the 6-year-old murder victim's fingernails.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/16/48hours/main661569.shtml

Thanks TexMex, that's good information. It appears that CellMark earned their money on this one.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

I'm new to following this case, but I thought I had read that the only "print" they found was a partial palm print - not a finger print. If that is true - it would mean that even if the investigators who were following him Thailand got a fingerprint on the sly, they still wouldn't be able to match it. Hope I'm making sense. Does anyone who has been following this case know if there were actual fingerprints at the scene?

Palm print (and foot print):

BOULDER, Colo. (AP) — Investigators have concluded that both a palm print and a footprint found in the home of JonBenet Ramsey were actually made by family members, not an intruder as some have suggested, the Rocky Mountain News reported Friday.

Investigators believe the prints found in the basement of the home were not related to the unsolved killing of the 6-year-old beauty queen, whose body was found Dec. 26, 1996.

Investigators have known the answers for some time, the newspaper reported.

A footprint found in mold on the floor of the Ramseys' wine cellar, near where the girl's body was found, was linked by investigators to her then-9-year-old brother, Burke. Burke, now 15, has long since been cleared by authorities.

Investigators also said a long-unidentified palm print on the door leading to the wine cellar is that of Melinda Ramsey, JonBenet's adult half sister, who was in Georgia at the time of the girl's death. The technician who originally ruled her out as the source of the print had made an error, the newspaper said.

http://www.courttv.com/archive/news/2002/0823/benet_ap.html



Info on fingerprints found, and to my knowledge, none of an intruder found:

• The fingerprints of Patsy and Burke were found on a bowl on a kitchen table from which JonBenet ate pineapple sometime after she arrived home, according to Det. Thomas, something inconsistent with the statements by John and Patsy that JonBenet was asleep when they arrived at home and never woke up. JonBenet had apparently gotten up during the night (or had never gone to sleep) and, with the help of Patsy and/or Burke (either of whom could reach the bowl stored in a cabinet well above the height JonBenet could reach), was served and ate the last food she consumed before she was killed.

• All five of the fingerprints recovered from the pad on which the ransom note was written that did not belong to policemen, according to Det. Thomas, belonged to Patsy.

http://crimemagazine.com/solvingjbr-main.html

 

[Nuisanceposter]

I have a problem with these Ramsey-hired PIs coming out and saying the fingernail DNA matches the underwear DNA. A lot of people on this board do not believe that the two DNA samples match. The only article that I have ever seen regarding the smaples matching is this 2005 article - is there another report, another article, that also states the same? Did anyone not associated with the Ramseys ever test to see of the DNA matched?

It was also my understanding that the fingernail was contaminated because the coroner's office did not use a sterile set of clippers for each nail. I heard Dr. Cyril Wecht say on telly on Friday that they were only able to obtain DNA from one of JB's nails, and it was of no use due to being so minute and contaminated.

I even made a thread asking about it a while ago.

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41488

 

[Solace]

I have a problem with these Ramsey-hired PIs coming out and saying the fingernail DNA matches the underwear DNA. A lot of people on this board do not believe that the two DNA samples match. The only article that I have ever seen regarding the smaples matching is this 2005 article - is there another report, another article, that also states the same? Did anyone not associated with the Ramseys ever test to see of the DNA matched?

It was also my understanding that the fingernail was contaminated because the coroner's office did not use a sterile set of clippers for each nail. I heard Dr. Cyril Wecht say on telly on Friday that they were only able to obtain DNA from one of JB's nails, and it was of no use due to being so minute and contaminated.

I even made a thread asking about it a while ago.

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41488

Hi Nuisanceposter,

I agree with you. There is so much bull@#$ going on TV right now, it is very hard to watch it. I saw Ollie Gray and his idiot friend detective on TV last night saying they were waiting for this day because there is so much evidence that the public does not know about, such as the fact that a suitcase was found underneath the window (broken) in the basement and there was glass on top of it.

He forgot to mention that Fleet White moved that suitcase next to the window and he himself picked up shards (sp?) of glass and placed them on the suitcase.

NP, come and visit us at A&E if you have time. Everyone is talking about this now and there is lots of discourse going on. There is a new RAmsey title and I miss reading yours and LIMoms great posts. So please come over.

 

[TexMex]

I have a problem with these Ramsey-hired PIs coming out and saying the fingernail DNA matches the underwear DNA. A lot of people on this board do not believe that the two DNA samples match. The only article that I have ever seen regarding the smaples matching is this 2005 article - is there another report, another article, that also states the same? Did anyone not associated with the Ramseys ever test to see of the DNA matched?

It was also my understanding that the fingernail was contaminated because the coroner's office did not use a sterile set of clippers for each nail. I heard Dr. Cyril Wecht say on telly on Friday that they were only able to obtain DNA from one of JB's nails, and it was of no use due to being so minute and contaminated.

I even made a thread asking about it a while ago.

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41488

Hi poster

They do have a complete profile from the underwear. It does not match the Ramsey's. Why would they lie about that DNA matching what's under the nails?

IMO Wecht is not the best source of info...isn't he under criminal indictment?

 

[Trino]

Maybe JKarr won't even need to plead insanity...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060820/ap_on_re_us/jonbenet_the_evidence_2

Then there is the DNA of an unknown male found in blood in JonBenet's underpants. Tests in 1997 and 1999 indicated it was from a male who was not a member of the Ramsey family.

Two years ago, Wood said a better-quality DNA profile was worked up but it did not match any samples in an FBI database of convicted violent offenders. At the time, that database included 1.5 million samples.

Celebrity forensic scientist Dr. Henry Lee, who initially participated in the Ramsey case, said even a positive DNA match is not always enough to convict.

"It can never be 100 percent," he said of the analysis which matches samples and donors by statistical probability.

If it turns out that a DNA sample from Karr matches crime-scene DNA, the first salvo from his attorney — whomever that turns out to be — would be against the testing process. As demonstrated by the O.J. Simpson criminal case, even supposedly ironclad genetic test results can be shaken by lapses in testing protocols or procedural breakdowns in handling evidence.

"Whoever represents this guy will whine about the testing that was done, and not being able to do their own testing," Grant said. "It's pretty standard."

There were also DNA traces found under the child's fingernails, but they were degraded and tests were inconclusive, Grant said.

Prosecutors need to find out if Karr truly knows anything about the case that isn't public knowledge, he said. In this sensationalized investigation, he does not think that is possible.

"The whole world knows everything about this case," Grant said. "I'd be surprised if everything I knew (as an investigator) wasn't out in the public domain."

 

[Details]

....Celebrity forensic scientist Dr. Henry Lee, who initially participated in the Ramsey case, said even a positive DNA match is not always enough to convict.

"It can never be 100 percent," he said of the analysis which matches samples and donors by statistical probability. ...

Lee is such an idiot - I think he's been bought by one too many defense attorneys. A 1 in several million chance of the DNA matching anyone else, while not 100%, is so close as to make reasonable doubt ridiculous! I mean, it's higher than eyewitness, even than ideal eyewitness testimony (identification at close range of someone the witness knows well).

And while it might have been nice to use new nail clippers, etc. - if they find a set of DNA in that collection that matches the DNA in the underwear - that's hugely significant, and can't be discounted just because we don't know which nail it came from.

 

[JBean]

Lee is such an idiot - I think he's been bought by one too many defense attorneys. A 1 in several million chance of the DNA matching anyone else, while not 100%, is so close as to make reasonable doubt ridiculous! I mean, it's higher than eyewitness, even than ideal eyewitness testimony (identification at close range of someone the witness knows well).

And while it might have been nice to use new nail clippers, etc. - if they find a set of DNA in that collection that matches the DNA in the underwear - that's hugely significant, and can't be discounted just because we don't know which nail it came from.

He really is a dork. I think on a total match the chance is 1 in 3 TRILLION that is an error.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

Maybe JKarr won't even need to plead insanity...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060820/ap_on_re_us/jonbenet_the_evidence_2

Then there is the DNA of an unknown male found in blood in JonBenet's underpants. Tests in 1997 and 1999 indicated it was from a male who was not a member of the Ramsey family.

Two years ago, Wood said a better-quality DNA profile was worked up but it did not match any samples in an FBI database of convicted violent offenders. At the time, that database included 1.5 million samples.

Celebrity forensic scientist Dr. Henry Lee, who initially participated in the Ramsey case, said even a positive DNA match is not always enough to convict.

"It can never be 100 percent," he said of the analysis which matches samples and donors by statistical probability.

If it turns out that a DNA sample from Karr matches crime-scene DNA, the first salvo from his attorney — whomever that turns out to be — would be against the testing process. As demonstrated by the O.J. Simpson criminal case, even supposedly ironclad genetic test results can be shaken by lapses in testing protocols or procedural breakdowns in handling evidence.

"Whoever represents this guy will whine about the testing that was done, and not being able to do their own testing," Grant said. "It's pretty standard."

There were also DNA traces found under the child's fingernails, but they were degraded and tests were inconclusive, Grant said.

Prosecutors need to find out if Karr truly knows anything about the case that isn't public knowledge, he said. In this sensationalized investigation, he does not think that is possible.

"The whole world knows everything about this case," Grant said. "I'd be surprised if everything I knew (as an investigator) wasn't out in the public domain."

So that refutes the claim that the DNA under the nails was matched to the DNA in the underwear. I figured it doesn't match or we'd have heard more about it than that one CBS article.

Some more info about the DNA here.

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27183&page=1&pp=25

Why would they lie? The RST is famous for releasing tidbits of info that prove to not be based entirely in truth.

 

[jc9876]

Have any of you ever heard of chimerism? (pronounced Kah mair ism)

A simplified version of this is that fraternal twin fertilized eggs (with different DNA) fuse very early in the pregnancy and form only one person. It sounds weird, but I've seen some documentaries on Discovery channel about this. Two examples were mothers of children who had DNA tests and they were ruled out as the mother. But the father was the father.

In these cases, different tissue within that person can have different DNA. So a person could leave one type of biological sample at a crime scene and give another (like semen vs. hair or blood vs saliva) and get different results even if the sample came from them.

So a perp could be ruled out as a suspect if the sample they provided had the twin DNA.

Here's a wikipedia link to Chimerism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_(genetics)

 

[SewingDeb]

Have any of you ever heard of chimerism? (pronounced Kah mair ism)

A simplified version of this is that fraternal twin fertilized eggs (with different DNA) fuse very early in the pregnancy and form only one person. It sounds weird, but I've seen some documentaries on Discovery channel about this. Two examples were mothers of children who had DNA tests and they were ruled out as the mother. But the father was the father.

In these cases, different tissue within that person can have different DNA. So a person could leave one type of biological sample at a crime scene and give another (like semen vs. hair or blood vs saliva) and get different results even if the sample came from them.

So a perp could be ruled out as a suspect if the sample they provided had the twin DNA.

Here's a wikipedia link to Chimerism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_(genetics)

I have heard of this. There is a lot about it on the internet and some websites that also have support group type forums.

Also, in our local paper years ago, there was an article about a case where one criminal's saliva DNA was not a match to his semen DNA. I wonder sometimes if some of those released from death row on DNA could have also different DNA depending on which part of the body the DNA is taken from.

 

[jc9876]

I have heard of this. There is a lot about it on the internet and some websites that also have support group type forums.

Also, in our local paper years ago, there was an article about a case where one criminal's saliva DNA was not a match to his semen DNA. I wonder sometimes if some of those released from death row on DNA could have also different DNA depending on which part of the body the DNA is taken from.

That is an extremely scary thought, eh? A killer getting off and smiling all the way home. Ugh!

 

[tumble]

So that refutes the claim that the DNA under the nails was matched to the DNA in the underwear. I figured it doesn't match or we'd have heard more about it than that one CBS article.

Some more info about the DNA here.

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27183&page=1&pp=25

Why would they lie? The RST is famous for releasing tidbits of info that prove to not be based entirely in truth.

I don't think the info about the fingernail DNA is matching the panties DNA is a deliberate lie.
I think it is a deliberate misinterpretation of facts that this match means that it is the killers DNA.

Only 2 markers were secured from the fingernail DNA which means that DNA would match at least 25% of all the population.

Also there are many possibiliteis for the DNA to get both on the panties and the fingernails. We don't know the history of the panties before the crime. JB could have picked up DNA on her fingers and transfered it to the panties or vice versa.

The DNA found in JB's blood on the panties was not as degraded as the foreign DNA found in those same bloodspots, indicating that the foreign DNA was deposited at an earlier time.

 

[scandi]

I'm wondering if the paint brush handle was broken while inside of her, hence the sliver deposited in the lining of her vaginal wall. And with the snap of that brush another sliver could have found itself under her rapists fingernail, generating a small bit of his blood on her panties as he pulled the brush handle out of her.

Scandi

 

[tumble]

I'm wondering if the paint brush handle was broken while inside of her, hence the sliver deposited in the lining of her vaginal wall. And with the snap of that brush another sliver could have found itself under her rapists fingernail, generating a small bit of his blood on her panties as he pulled the brush handle out of her.

Scandi

There are many possibilities how the perp could have injured themselves. I think your suggestion is quite far fetched.

We have the autopsy and that is complete as of a ruling in 1997. And no mention of anything more than a small fragment of cellulose in the vagina. So I think you can leave the idea about a 'big' piece of paintbrush inside of her.

And if the perp left blood at the same time as JB the DNA would not be as degraded as it was.

 

[Details]

And if the perp left blood at the same time as JB the DNA would not be as degraded as it was.

I don't know about that - I'd say obviously the perp was much, much, infinitely more degraded than JBR.

 

[rashomon]

I have a question: was the foreign DNA in JB's underpants found only in a bloodspot of JB or also on other, non-bloody parts of her underwear?
For in case the DNA was only found in that bloodspot - just a thought: couldn't this DNA have been transferred to JB from the instrument (paintbrush handle or whatever) with which the vaginal injury had been inflicted?
And old paintbrush maybe, which had been touched by many people before?

 

[Nuisanceposter]

I don't think the info about the fingernail DNA is matching the panties DNA is a deliberate lie.
I think it is a deliberate misinterpretation of facts that this match means that it is the killers DNA.

Only 2 markers were secured from the fingernail DNA which means that DNA would match at least 25% of all the population.

Also there are many possibiliteis for the DNA to get both on the panties and the fingernails. We don't know the history of the panties before the crime. JB could have picked up DNA on her fingers and transfered it to the panties or vice versa.

The DNA found in JB's blood on the panties was not as degraded as the foreign DNA found in those same bloodspots, indicating that the foreign DNA was deposited at an earlier time.

I thought we did know the history of the panties before the crime - weren't they taken fresh and new out of the package, never worn before?

 

[tumble]

I thought we did know the history of the panties before the crime - weren't they taken fresh and new out of the package, never worn before?

I don't think so, I mean the detailed history of the object. She could have been wearing them at the Whites.
She could have been to the toilet at her home wearing those panties Christmas eve.
She could have had DNA on her fingers that was transfered to the panties Christmas eve.

Also included is the history of the object before it was packed ie which factory worker that actually handled them.