McDuck,
That could have come from the manufacturing plant. The touch dna could have come from the bloomies themselves.
No, it could not. First of all, the examples of DNA traces within underwear never exceeded a tenth of the DNA for UM1, and unlike UM1, that DNA was degraded. And even more importantly, the source of the DNA for UM1 was a bodily fluid, while the traces on the longjohns were touch DNA. Two different sources of DNA, making any claim to contamination baseless.
We know who dunnit; just not exactly who did what. We are all working here to put together the howtosolveit. It’s a homicide case.
Yes, this reasoning is precisely the problem. No one has solved the case, yet the BPD and others have already decided who the killer was. This is the reason this case (and so many like it) was botched, and remains so to this day. Arrogant LEOs who value their intuition over actual evidence.
Will the FBI do? Burke Ramsey’s disturbing behavior before and after JonBenet’s murder point to him as being responsible. FBI special agent Jim Clemente said, “Burke had a history of scatological problems” (CBS Real Crime).
The same Clemente who embarrased himself in the CBS documentary, that they had to settle with Burke because of how defamatory it was? Anyway, it's
former FBI special agent. The history amounted to some (alleged) smearing three years before the murder, while his mother was deathly ill from cancer.
Burke showed these problems by leaving excrement around the Ramsey house. According to the Ramsey’s former housekeeper, Linda Hoffman Pugh, Burke was known to leave feces specifically in JonBenet’s bed and to spread it on walls in the home. (Reynolds).
It took me a while before I realized who "Reynolds" was. The writer of the Sun article above. My god.
Even in
that article, it doesn't say what you say:
They cited the evidence of a housekeeper who said excrement the size of a grapefruit was once smeared on the young girl's bed sheets.
Linda Hoffman-Pugh said: "After they sealed off JonBenet's room, the crime scene technicians went through it, they apparently found faeces smeared on a box of candy she had got for Christmas."
At no point did Hoffman-Pugh say that Burke left the feces in the bed.
When crime scene technicians visited Jon Benet’s bedroom after sealing it off, they apparently found “feces smeared on a box of candy” she had gotten for Christmas” (Reynolds).
A box which was apparently never tested, nor collected as evidence. And the basis for its existence appears to be gossip from Linda Hoffman-Pugh: "they apparently found".
This abnormal behavior suggests that Burke not only had mental issues, but he also may have had jealousy issues towards his sister.
Or that people around the case liked to gossip.
BR getting a bike for Christmas is a big deal in this case. Somehow it disappeared Christmas night.
Wait, what bike disappeared? What's the source for that? And again, how would the bike be a big deal in this case? Is there any indication that the bike was involved in the murder?
BR states his mom came into his room turning on and off the lights and saying “where is my baby“. According to BR she was going psycho.
And he pretended to be asleep, so his parents thought he was asleep and told the police that. At no point did they lie.
1st question was addressed in previous quote. 2nd question: PR initially stated she put JB to bed in her red turtleneck sweater.
The only source for that is the rambling, error-riddled report by officer French, well in over his head. Quite frankly, it falls on its own absurdity. JonBenet was wearing the white Gap shirt to the White party (and the police have pictures, so they know she wore it), and was found dead in it. According to her parents (whenever we hear from them directly) they let her sleep in the white shirt while switching out her pants for a pair of longjohns. There is no earthly reason to change a sleeping child into a different piece of daywear when putting her to bed, a turtleneck in particular.
The reason this gets harped on is that a desperate Steve Thomas latched onto the turtleneck (found balled up in her room) having been soaked with urine during bedwetting, despite never testing it for urine or even checking if it was wet. Anyway, it's easy enough to understand why French misunderstood (like he did about the reading). Very likely, he never imagined those details would be given that amount of importance.
In the A&E documentary,
JonBenet's father John Ramsey gives a new interviewabout the investigation into his family and how the media's influence on public opinion affected their lives. "We absolutely felt like we were the victim of a lynch mob," John Ramsey said of the experience.
But that wasn't what I asked about. You said "Insisting all the while (these past 26 years) that it was not JB that was the victim here." I asked where they said JonBenet wasn't a victim. Again, where did they say that?
What makes this interesting is that now the dna can give us a complete profile of the killer. Basically a photograph. Down the the color of eyes and hair. Where is this picture?
That's up to the BPD now. Sadly, they appear to have no interest in doing the work.