Premeditated murder by an Intruder

[tipper]

Seeker -

Source for Baden using tap water is page 27 "Dead Reckoning "

"Collecting samples from this body requires a rape kit, which contains tubes for fluid collection, envelopes for scrapings and hair, and swabs with corresponding containers to protect them from contamination. After a swab is used it is suspended in a cardboard box that holds it firmly so that nothing touches the tip. Tiny envelopes hold individual hairsm fingernails, fibers. Vials hold blood or urine.

While DNA must be preserved dry to avoid deterioration, swabs may have to be wet in order to pick up such evidence. Then they have to be dried, preserved and analyzed. A lot of medical examiners insist on using distilled water to moisten swabs. They don't want any contamination of foreign substances. I think its a little silly. Tap water is fine. There's lots of stuff in city water, but sperm isn't one of them. And right now we're swabbing for sperm."

It appears maintaining a sterility is a matter of personal preference. So perhaps the morgue Seeker was in felt it was important, others don't seem to place a great deal of emphasis on it. I noticed one of the links mentioned thoroughly cleaning tools between collection locations at the crime scene but didn't say they must be sterile.

 

[little1]

What if....an intruder killed JonBenet?

My theory would be that if an intruder killed JonBenet, he/she would have planned it ahead of time.

My reasoning is this...this intruder either had close contact or a close relationship with JonBenet. It would have had to been a neighbor since JonBenet was always with a grown-up when she went places.

However; she did ride her old bike up and down the street and someone started coveting her. They watched her every time she was outside...and then their fantasies started growing stronger.

Christmas night this intruder decided to pay a visit to JonBenet.

This murder by an intruder would be somewhat similar in the Danielle Van Damm case because the monster David Westerfield used to watch Danielle play and look through her bedroom window with his binoculars.

David Westerfield was coveting Danielle Van Damm. He finally made his move.

IMO this could not just be a dude in the neighborhood who saw her a few times and decided to break into her house on Christmas night, lie in wait for the family to return. First of all, what kind of family life did this guy have to be able to sit in the Ramsey home for unknown hours waiting for them? It was Christmas night! Also, he would have to have had some idea as to what the Ramsey's schedule was going to be on those days, he would have to know when they were going to leave and around when they would return. I find it highly suspicious to think that someone would hide under a bed for hours at a time. This was a big house, why not in a closet? Hell, why not in the basement where there would be more room? Who really hides under a bed besides a child? ANd if this were a full grown male, I doubt he would have had ample room to get under there easily without shimmying himself---thus leaving much forensic evidence such as hair & fibers on the carpet. In the pic of the bed skirt in the house that looked ruffled---did the carpet look as if someone had manuvered to get under the bed? It looked pretty freshly vacuumed to me----at least like no one had even walked into the room for some time.

 

[Seeker]

Seeker, one should never assume.

I listed sites which detail the various procedures used in several jurisdictions.

Actually if you had read the sites you linked to you would have noticed that these are alternatives to how a coroner must procede to collect evidence. It's no different between jurisdictions. The national standards apply. Variations can be implemented if the standard collection procedures cannot be carried out.

Certainly clipping is preferred over scrapings and Dr. Meyer noted JonBenet's fingernails were indeed long enough to be clipped. The question is not which is preferred, but whether or not Dr. Meyer used contaminated clippers. That allegation came from Thomas and was cited from his book. What would be interesting is to find where the 'rumor' of contaminated clippers arose.

Rainsong

The allegation came from Thomas and was verified by Susan Bennett...let's not forget that.

The info about the clippers would have come from someone who was there during the autopsy...

I don't believe Meyer, or his staff was really as careful as they should have been.

tipper, thanks for the info, I haven't read that book. I will say that the proceedures for collecting semen (which is not microscopic) and for collecting DNA from under the nails is completely different. You don't swab under the nails...

I have 9 years experience in the Calif medical field. 4 of those were in the Pathology Dept so I know the recommended procedures. That's how I knew that Calif does not prefer or recommend (both words=same meaning) scraping over clipping.

 

[Rainsong]

Actually if you had read the sites you linked to you would have noticed that these are alternatives to how a coroner must procede to collect evidence. It's no different between jurisdictions. The national standards apply.(snip)

and for collecting DNA from under the nails is completely different. You don't swab under the nails...

I have 9 years experience in the Calif medical field. 4 of those were in the Pathology Dept so I know the recommended procedures. That's how I knew that Calif does not prefer or recommend (both words=same meaning) scraping over clipping.

How odd. One of the sites mentioned does indeed mention something about swabbing fingernails. I have to admit, I was rather confused by that particular mention...

I reiterate, the document I pointed you toward is a STATE document. As such, it should be regarded as, at the very least, a guideline, if not protocol/recommendation/preference. If not the recommended (choose your own word) then why waste the time and effort in publishing it?

Rainsong

 

[Seeker]

I already explained that above. I'll do it again so maybe you'll be better able to understand.

The recommended/prefered method of collecting DNA evidence from under the fingernails is not in that document. It has nothing to do with the proper procedure of collecting DNA evidence during an autopsy.

It's only for the possibility of field collection and only if the coroner, or trained evidence collection technician is not available to do the collection of evidence at the crime scene instead of bagging, taping and moving the body to the morgue.

It is not a guideline for proper procedures during an actual autopsy which is what we were discussing. The way Meyer collected the fingernail clippings from JonBenet was the topic was it not?

You really should read the entire document before making statements about what it is for. It is not what you seem to think it is.

None of the sites reference swabing fingernails. Swabing the finger to collect blood or other fluids from the attacker (that was for rape victims) yes, under the nails no.

 

[little1]

Do you two want to start a thread about collection of evidence or do you wnat ot get back to the thread subject? Not trying to sound rude, but you both have just gone back & forth with this wholet hing and it hasn't gon anywhere.

 

[Rainsong]

The recommended/prefered method of collecting DNA evidence from under the fingernails is not in that document. It has nothing to do with the proper procedure of collecting DNA evidence during an autopsy.

Preservation of the evidence should be the main goal of anyone collecting said evidence regardless of whether in the field or during autopsy.

Whether this document refers to field collection or lab collection has no bearing on methods used.

Rainsong

 

[Seeker]

Preservation of the evidence should be the main goal of anyone collecting said evidence regardless of whether in the field or during autopsy.

Whether this document refers to field collection or lab collection has no bearing on methods used.

Rainsong

Seems this post of yours contradicts your prior posts. You specifically tried to use that document to bolster your arguement that it was the proper and recommended procedure (scraping under fingernails) in Calif....IOW the methods used for collection...

However I agree that the ultimate goal is to preserve evidence whether it's collected in the field or on the autopsy table.
Meyer didn't preserve the evidence when he used unclean clippers on both hands...

Like I said, I would like to have had the DNA of the prior corpse he examined tested to see if what they found "under" JB's nails and in her panties was a match. Seems that the DNA they do have could easily be from cross contamination due to poor autopsy procedures.

They would have gotten a complete strand if JB had scratched her attacker. That's the main reason I believe the DNA could have possibly come from cross contamination upon examination.