Buzz Mills
New Member
-bump-
Q & A Thread..Merged threads... 8/18
- Thread starter Anngelique
- Start date
Anngelique
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2004
- Messages
- 7,184
- Reaction score
- 27
luvbeaches said:
But that guy did not confess to doing it. Nor was he charged with child *advertiser censored* before. Nor was obssessed with JonBenet. That's what's so ironic to it to me.
Anngelique
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2004
- Messages
- 7,184
- Reaction score
- 27
Okay, I haven't followed this case like so many of you. I never really followed crime until the Lacy Peterson case.
So my question is this...
If they have DNA from under JonBenet's fingernails and that DNA never matched the parents or brother, why do people still think the family did it?
Now I was one who felt like the family was to blame for a long time but like I said I never followed this one closely. But if the reports I'm now reading are correct and they truly have the perps DNA, shouldn't the parents then be exonerated if the DNA did not match.
Anyone have some expert knowledge on this?
So my question is this...
If they have DNA from under JonBenet's fingernails and that DNA never matched the parents or brother, why do people still think the family did it?
Now I was one who felt like the family was to blame for a long time but like I said I never followed this one closely. But if the reports I'm now reading are correct and they truly have the perps DNA, shouldn't the parents then be exonerated if the DNA did not match.
Anyone have some expert knowledge on this?
Buzz Mills
New Member
Little things like that don't mean anything to any of our adamant "The Ramseys Are Guilty" posters. They figure DNA didn't stop OJ, and they'll be damned if a little thing like DNA is going to stop John and/or Patsy Ramsey, from being convicted, even in abstentia, or posthumously, whichever way they want to call it. Just when we think DNA is finally really catching on, along comes the flipside of an OJ type case, and we're back to square one all over again.Anngelique said:
Anngelique
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2004
- Messages
- 7,184
- Reaction score
- 27
Buzzm1 said:
Interesting, very interesting.
luvbeaches
New Member
Anngelique said:
I agree that it's really odd, and it does look a lot like him, but at this point, I truely believe this guy is just a nutball, so to me, it's means nothing more than when the R's were after the other guy who looked like the sketch. He may have been obsessed with JonBenet, but from everything that I have read, it was after her death. When did he come in contact with her before? Same thing with Polly Klaas. It was after her death that he became obsessed. That's why I don't really put much stock in this picture...but it does look like him.
femepetite
Silver-Haired
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2003
- Messages
- 409
- Reaction score
- 1
...this should be interesting because of the DNA issue in this case. it will be telling when Karr has his DNA profiled and compared. FNC reported earlier today that Thai LE has sent a DNA sample to the states for testing. now all we have to do is...wait.
Linda7NJ
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2005
- Messages
- 32,101
- Reaction score
- 8,213
Because the DNA found under her nails wasn't from scratching the perp. It was minuscule. The world is littered with DNA. Humans shed thousands of skin cells everyday. Poor little JonBenet wasn't bathed very often either so who knows how long it was there?
It was never a DNA case, not then and not now.
It was never a DNA case, not then and not now.
Buzz Mills
New Member
-bump-
Anngelique
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2004
- Messages
- 7,184
- Reaction score
- 27
Linda7NJ said:
So there was no semen either? And why wasn't she bathed often? Sorry, I guess I'm really a rookie.
Buzz Mills
New Member
I wonder if a mod can start merging some of these threads, or whether it would even be worth it, at this point??
femepetite
Silver-Haired
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2003
- Messages
- 409
- Reaction score
- 1
...ummm. i beg to differ here. Michael Bodden said today that there was enought DNA on the body to determine that it is from an outsode source. now, if it matches Karr's, that would be important.
luvbeaches
New Member
I was always under the impression that it was too degraded to do a complete match with anyone (but I don't know this for sure). If the DNA was all they had, there'd be no way that I would think the R's were involved, or someone they know. However, there is much, much more that can't be explained away, to me anyway.
Now, if this guy that confessed is somehow linked to the crime, and is found guilty, then I am fully prepared to say that's that.
I just have questions that have not been answered at this point. I don't want the R's to be guilty, on the other hand, if they were involved, then I want justice served. And many of those that don't think they were involved, would never accept even a confession from an Ramsey...
Now, if this guy that confessed is somehow linked to the crime, and is found guilty, then I am fully prepared to say that's that.
I just have questions that have not been answered at this point. I don't want the R's to be guilty, on the other hand, if they were involved, then I want justice served. And many of those that don't think they were involved, would never accept even a confession from an Ramsey...
just out of interest, how do we know how often JBR was bathed ?Linda7NJ said:
It would seem that if the poor kid was not bathed often then there could be multiple DNA samples under her fingernails.Surely, some would match Karr if he is the killer.I agre e that this is not a DNA case. I also read somewhere that the poor kid wore make up to school and looked dishevelled.This I find hard to believe because Patsy looks like a Neat freak. Bet her house was a pig sty though.
luvbeaches
New Member
kazzbar said:
I think the former housekeeper said that things were a mess.
twinkiesmom
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 1,660
- Reaction score
- 41
<<Now I was one who felt like the family was to blame for a long time but like I said I never followed this one closely. But if the reports I'm now reading are correct and they truly have the perps DNA, shouldn't the parents then be exonerated if the DNA did not match.>>
In an ordinary case, there is semen or blood....a smear or a droplet or a puddlle. When they DNA test the blood or the semen...they match the DNA results to a stain.
The DNA in this case is not enough to have even have come from a drop of human blood...it's a speck that has been amplified thousands upon thousands of times.
This is the downside of the new DNA technology...it is extremely sensitive...but are you amplifying a true perp sample or something extraneous...a cough, a sneeze, someone scratches their head and drops a flake of dandruff.
Henry Lee says this is not a DNA case.
The concern about the DNA in this case is it could have come from a playmate, bad lab technique, you name it....It could have come from the toilet bowl at the White's house.
The DNA has been found...If it matches someone like Karr, you know he had to have done it since there's no other explanation for it being there. But it's not enough DNA to clear anybody.
In an ordinary case, there is semen or blood....a smear or a droplet or a puddlle. When they DNA test the blood or the semen...they match the DNA results to a stain.
The DNA in this case is not enough to have even have come from a drop of human blood...it's a speck that has been amplified thousands upon thousands of times.
This is the downside of the new DNA technology...it is extremely sensitive...but are you amplifying a true perp sample or something extraneous...a cough, a sneeze, someone scratches their head and drops a flake of dandruff.
Henry Lee says this is not a DNA case.
The concern about the DNA in this case is it could have come from a playmate, bad lab technique, you name it....It could have come from the toilet bowl at the White's house.
The DNA has been found...If it matches someone like Karr, you know he had to have done it since there's no other explanation for it being there. But it's not enough DNA to clear anybody.