10 LOCI is enough to be virtually certain about a match. 13 LOCI is not a full genetic profile either. That's not how DNA testing works.
Why?
POLL: Has the DNA evidence changed your theory on who killed Jonbenet?
- Thread starter Tristan
- Start date
Exactly SD. 10 IS NOT A FULL PROFILE. 13 is. And we don't have 13. We have 13 with JB's though.
Yes, exactly. No problem whatsoever getting the full 13 with hers and since the murdered supposedly left his, why is it partial? It is partial because it is degraded; It is degraded because it is older. It is older and therefore was not put there the night of the murder.
TexMex
Punishment is justice for the unjust.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2004
- Messages
- 7,615
- Reaction score
- 56
She went to a seminar about this new technology. She thought enough to send out evidence to be tested. Open mind. That is a good thing.
Yeah.
The fact that they got 13 LOCI with JB's DNA gives no indication about the time in which the other DNA was deposited. There just wasn't enough DNA (or it wasn't in good enough condition) to get 13 LOCI with the other DNA. This doesn't mean that it was deposited earlier than JB's.
It isn't particlarly significant that we don't have 13.
The problem, Tex, is that she's not open minded. She refused help from people who had worked the case, never even attempted to contact them, and on and on.
Alex Hunter was a lousy DA, but he'd listen to what everyone had to say. Even his detractors admit that. Lacy is like Paul Simon's "Boxer:" hears what she wants to hear and disregards the rest.
Alex Hunter was a lousy DA, but he'd listen to what everyone had to say. Even his detractors admit that. Lacy is like Paul Simon's "Boxer:" hears what she wants to hear and disregards the rest.
It's significant within the totality, as you yourself have mentioned. I'm just taking the holistic view.
Yes, but we have two different DNAs and the DA is saying that the murderer left his DNA in her underwear that night - yet it is degraded; JonBenet's is mixed with the DNA from the "murderer", Why is hers not degraded. Because hers was deposited there that night. Also, the DNA on the leggings has only 10 markers, that is also degraded.
No.
I havn't changed my theory - I still lean towards RDI.
We don't yet know (and we may never know) who's DNA this is - the 3 points of contact; two in the longjhons and one in the panties. It could turn out that it doesn't belong to the killer.
I havn't changed my theory - I still lean towards RDI.
We don't yet know (and we may never know) who's DNA this is - the 3 points of contact; two in the longjhons and one in the panties. It could turn out that it doesn't belong to the killer.
LinasK
Verified insider- Mark Dribin case
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 26,876
- Reaction score
- 24,344
So if you can believe that Patsy was a pageant diva mother and that that behavior is wrong, why can't you take it to the next logical step and believe that because JB was dressed that provocatively that it was John who went after her? As horrifying a thought as it is, incest happens all the time, far more often than stranger attacks.
TexMex
Punishment is justice for the unjust.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2004
- Messages
- 7,615
- Reaction score
- 56
It is partial most likely because there was a much smaller amount (still enough to do STR testing thought). But even if it was more degraded doesn't mean its older. To argue that it is more degraded because it is older is a non-sequitur.
Non-sequitur.
Where do you read that?
I have another point: since tex pointed out to me that pedophile killers exist (not that he had to, given the state I live in), he probably also knows that they don't just kill once and stop. They can't stop. You can't cure these people. And, since these pageants have not ceased since JB's death, you'd think there would have been an epidemic of crimes like this in the intervening decade.
Nope.
ONE!
DNA is DNA, is it not?
Am I wrong?
Jayce Honey,
Your obsessed with Latin. We all took it, but lets not go overboard with its usage, it is very telling. Its similar to when someone finishes their first psychology course - everyone is getting analyzed.
SuperDave and Solace,
We don't know why they got 10 LOCI... its likely because there was only a small amount of DNA. There is no way, though, that one can argue that DNA degradation due to time is relevant here. There are many things that can cause DNA to degrade, time is one of them. But degradation due to time takes a long, long time. Way too long for there to be any difference between JB's DNA and the DNA found.
We don't know why they got 10 LOCI... its likely because there was only a small amount of DNA. There is no way, though, that one can argue that DNA degradation due to time is relevant here. There are many things that can cause DNA to degrade, time is one of them. But degradation due to time takes a long, long time. Way too long for there to be any difference between JB's DNA and the DNA found.