LazyCat08
I may not be Glenn Beck, but I am a thinker......
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 188
- Reaction score
- 9
http://news4colorado.com/topstories/topstories_story_352213930.html
Obviously above headline is true if and only if, the male with the un-associated dna killed JonBenet. But if three different locations match for foreign dna, then the *probability* of an IDI scenario increases.
Those size 12 pants, which were new and a recent purchase by Patsy as a gift for another relative.
I think JonBenet was redressed in that underwear, which was *new* and whilst I can accept cross-contamination may occur surely not to under her nails and externally.
Same reasoning applies to forensic cross-contamination, its possible, but why just those critical areas?[/QUOTE]
CAN someone help me out??? I just need this clarified:
I always wondered about the assertion that the body was "wiped & reddressed" and the size 12 underwear:
#1 Where medical examiners no able to dtermine that?? If there were smears consistent with attempts to wash the body was that not photographed or recorded somewhere???
#2 How does anyone know that the size 12 panties where "new" - was it ever determined exactly where in the house they came from? There are so many unanswered questions just right here alone - none of my relatives ever bought me underwear when I was young. Who was the this female relative for whom the underwear was for and she stay with the Ramsey's? If there was abuse occuring in the house - was there any evidence that other children in the family were victims as well?
#3 Did the DNA inside the panities match the DNA under her fingure nails? I always wondered how they knew that DNA wasn't there before the panties were put on her. What about the original pair (her size) she was wearing that night? were they ever found?
Without being too graphic, exactly what kind of DNA was mixed with her blood? Human tissue, semen?? Is that the only foreign DNA found on/in/near the body?
If someone could shed some light here I'd appreciate it. I've read so many thing online but never really found answers...
Obviously above headline is true if and only if, the male with the un-associated dna killed JonBenet. But if three different locations match for foreign dna, then the *probability* of an IDI scenario increases.
Those size 12 pants, which were new and a recent purchase by Patsy as a gift for another relative.
I think JonBenet was redressed in that underwear, which was *new* and whilst I can accept cross-contamination may occur surely not to under her nails and externally.
Same reasoning applies to forensic cross-contamination, its possible, but why just those critical areas?[/QUOTE]
CAN someone help me out??? I just need this clarified:
I always wondered about the assertion that the body was "wiped & reddressed" and the size 12 underwear:
#1 Where medical examiners no able to dtermine that?? If there were smears consistent with attempts to wash the body was that not photographed or recorded somewhere???
#2 How does anyone know that the size 12 panties where "new" - was it ever determined exactly where in the house they came from? There are so many unanswered questions just right here alone - none of my relatives ever bought me underwear when I was young. Who was the this female relative for whom the underwear was for and she stay with the Ramsey's? If there was abuse occuring in the house - was there any evidence that other children in the family were victims as well?
#3 Did the DNA inside the panities match the DNA under her fingure nails? I always wondered how they knew that DNA wasn't there before the panties were put on her. What about the original pair (her size) she was wearing that night? were they ever found?
Without being too graphic, exactly what kind of DNA was mixed with her blood? Human tissue, semen?? Is that the only foreign DNA found on/in/near the body?
If someone could shed some light here I'd appreciate it. I've read so many thing online but never really found answers...