Burke did NOT kill JonBenet

[Ponytale]

Yes, there is DNA in her fingernails from an unknown male and this same DNA (presumed to be saliva GIVEN the high amylase levels) is also found mixed with JonBenets blood in the CROTCH of her underwear and also in the waist band of her longjohns that she was wearing. NONE of the DNA found in these critical areas are from members in her immediate family.

Actually..
It is only assumed to be saliva, not proven. The serological testing that was done on the underwear for amylase (An enzyme most highly found in saliva or sweat, but also is found in high doses of urine, in witch the underwear and long johns were soaked in.) were actually inconclusive. The biological source for that DNA (UM1) has never been confirmed or sourced.

And based on the testing results from Bode, Patsy and Burke could not be excluded from the profile found on the exterior left side of the long johns.

 

[GRT]

Actually, as I understand, it's not been proven to be a match. The DNA sample is so small that there wasn't enough of a profile recovered from either the panties or the fingernails to say that the samples matched.

That came from Lou Smit. He said the DNA under the nails was a match to the DNA mixed with her blood in her panties.

As I understand, it is a small amount--a partial profile--but both samples have sufficient markers to identify them as coming from the same unknown male.

 

[GRT]

Actually..
It is only assumed to be saliva, not proven. The serological testing that was done on the underwear for amylase (An enzyme most highly found in saliva or sweat, but also is found in high doses of urine, in witch the underwear and long johns were soaked in.) were actually inconclusive. The biological source for that DNA (UM1) has never been confirmed or sourced.

And based on the testing results from Bode, Patsy and Burke could not be excluded from the profile found on the exterior left side of the long johns.

Yes, they're just assuming it was saliva. They ruled out semen. It could also be sweat, I read.

I've also heard the Ramsey family's DNA was found in different places on her clothing, I think that's to be expected.

But, it was the unknown male DNA in the crotch of her underwear, mixed with her blood, that led the DA to publicly exonerate the Ramseys.

 

[snarast]

Source:
- Episode 11 of The Killing of JonBenet podcast and also from a podcast that I don’t remember the name, but Mitch Morrisey was a guest on the episode.
- I have a degree in biochemistry and cell biology and genetics was part of the curriculum.

So, I’ll see if I can explain better, because I re read my prior post and it is confusing (and has an error).
So, CODIS stores information from samples from 20 core DNA loci and these 20 core loci are “autosomal loci” meaning that BOTH the “X” chromosome and “Y” chromosome have the same gene (but, that gene has a particular DNA “code” or allele). So, when those two alleles from an individual are put together, then they form their own “Code” let’s say A145a273 for an example. So, because the larger DNA sample that we have from JBR is mixed with her blood, and at least one other “X” chromosome from another individual, then we can’t reliably tell what “X” chromosome belongs to the offender. So, the partial Y- STR profile that is available from the offender hasn’t yielded any matches because the FBI uses a stringent search criteria that considers a “match” when there is a 1 in 10 million probability that it belong to one person. So, thinking of it backwards… when the DNA is run in CODIS, it’s actually encountering too many “matches” to the point that it can’t give a good probability. (That’s my understanding at least). So, JAR and investigative team in the podcast interviewed a world-renowned forensic scientist from the UK to discuss how, in other countries, they lower the parameters, so that they can at least get some results (like, lower it to a probability of say 1 in 1 million). I hope that makes sense?

Edited to fix error

An autosomal loci is per definition not X or Y, though.

I have a degree in bioinformatics, but since it’s not verified here, I’ll lean on ncbi for guidance:

INHERITANCE PATTERNS - Understanding Genetics - NCBI Bookshelf

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[snarast]

I’m sorry if I’m nitpicking, but for some reason I think we have to be clear when we talk about this because it’s really non-trivial concepts.

I don’t doubt there’s a problem with the sequences, but I also think it might be avoidable if you adjust dna sequencing procedures and analytics pipelines to each case, to get the most out of whatever DNA/RNA you might have.

If you don’t do that - if your rules are too rigid, you may loose chances to get perps. My suggestion? Get a consult from experts outside LE. They don’t play favourites, don’t have agendas.

 

[AddieBoo]

I don't believe either BR or a Foreign Faction had anything to do with what happened that night and I don't believe that blanket was tossed over her in an attempt to show affection; it was thrown on top of the body for the purposes of concealing it and no, I don't believe the story about her having been wrapped "papoose-like".

How can a body be wrapped papoose style with their arms straight above their head?
It’s almost romanticizing her state of death…it’s like a description from the end of a murder script about a dead body…
And then the whole family abandons her..lying on the carpet next to the Christmas tree for the next 5 hours until the coroner finally shows up…

 

[AddieBoo]

It is my belief that the kidnap victim, JBR, did not leave the home because dumping the body threatened the chance of a proper burial. The tiny child would have been very easy to bundle away in the night.
IMHO

Proper burial… oh right. Nothing like more photo ops and a ritual. IMO they were aware and concerned with DNA evidence. That’s why all the elements and body are in one place.
MOO

 

[CloudedTruth]

Actually, as I understand, it's not been proven to be a match. The DNA sample is so small that there wasn't enough of a profile recovered from either the panties or the fingernails to say that the samples matched.

Exactly. It remains inconclusive as the DNA sample was insufficient to say with any certainty that it was a match. Conversely, it could not be 100% ruled out, so some have made the leap to saying it matches.

 

[AddieBoo]

So a brief summary would be that...
Ramsey's are to believe that a sick minded crazy intruder from a Foreign Faction is behind the murder of their beloved daughter, but that sick minded person did not mean to hurt John by killing Jonbenet, or even mean to kill her in the first place because he cared for her for keeping her warm inside in a blanket.

Now why would a father whos daughter had been killed in his own house defend that sick minded person by saying "I don't think he meant to kill her..." ? Unless he knew that this really was the case.

Someone did not mean to kill Jonbenet. It was just something that had to be done because there were no other options left anymore. It was not meant to be so. And after that person killed her he showed his affection and care about her by wrapping her in a blanket to keep her safe and warm... And, there was only one other "he" in that house besides John that we know about. IMO

Interestingly, that statement goes along with JAR asking for forgiveness for that crazy minded intruder that killed his half-sister.

Now how many parents could imagine that situation and see themselves thinking about the caring sides of the killer and asking forgiveness for him?

But then the housekeeper said she found the same type of garrote down in the basement outside the wine room- wrapped around a box…
(From LHP book quoted on TCRS podcast)
how much of this frickin murder was planned?
That statement made by JR is so melodramatic- just like the RN. IMO
Is this what the GJ heard that led them to believe, the murder of JB was first degree murder?

 

[Ponytale]

That came from Lou Smit. He said the DNA under the nails was a match to the DNA mixed with her blood in her panties.

As I understand, it is a small amount--a partial profile--but both samples have sufficient markers to identify them as coming from the same unknown male.

And Lou had his opinion on that matter. The fact known to this day is that there were not enough alleles to make a match.

Most of the DNA found under her fingernails was her own (we all have our own DNA under our fingernails). Yes, few additional contributors were found, but they all were only 1-3 alleles, meaning they were too weak to be compared to any other samples, including the UM1 (witch for itself was also a weak sample on its own). In the fingernail and underwear DNA samples there were no genotypes identified at any of the loci. Only single alleles were found. And one allele can be shared by many people.

Plus, there is also a theory regarding the contaminated clippers used by the coroner.

 

[Ponytale]

But then the housekeeper said she found the same type of garrote down in the basement outside the wine room- wrapped around a box…
(From LHP book quoted on TCRS podcast)

I have read about that, but as far as I understand, it is only considered to be a rumor as nothing similar to this was found by police or taken into the evidence.

But if there were similar objects seen by the housekeeper at the house, I think that there is a possibility that Burke (and John) practiced making knots and tying ropes. Burke was in Scouts and he was into sailing with his father who was in Navy. I have also thought about the possibility if the called "garrote" (not a garrote!) device was actually something that was pre-made and was just lying around at the basement. Only thing that bothers me with that idea is that JonBenet's hair was entangled in the knot. That would indicate that it was not pre-made...

 

[GRT]

And Lou had his opinion on that matter. The fact known to this day is that there were not enough alleles to make a match.

Most of the DNA found under her fingernails was her own (we all have our own DNA under our fingernails). Yes, few additional contributors were found, but they all were only 1-3 alleles, meaning they were too weak to be compared to any other samples, including the UM1 (witch for itself was also a weak sample on its own). In the fingernail and underwear DNA samples there were no genotypes identified at any of the loci. Only single alleles were found. And one allele can be shared by many people.

Plus, there is also a theory regarding the contaminated clippers used by the coroner.

You could be right, but it’s also been reported in People that it matched.

“According to Cold Case, there was DNA found in her underwear that also matched what was found under her fingernails. In 2016, 9News reported that the same DNA was found on JonBenét’s long johns — a discovery that led Lacy to believe that police had the killer’s DNA profile.”

 

[AddieBoo]

I have read about that, but as far as I understand, it is only considered to be a rumor as nothing similar to this was found by police or taken into the evidence.

But if there were similar objects seen by the housekeeper at the house, I think that there is a possibility that Burke (and John) practiced making knots and tying ropes. Burke was in Scouts and he was into sailing with his father who was in Navy. I have also thought about the possibility if the called "garrote" (not a garrote!) device was actually something that was pre-made and was just lying around at the basement. Only thing that bothers me with that idea is that JonBenet's hair was entangled in the knot. That would indicate that it was not pre-made...

And those fibers from the Christmas jacket of PR …,
Maybe she was attempting to remove that garrote from JB neck?

 

[Swirlz]

And those fibers from the Christmas jacket of PR …,
Maybe she was attempting to remove that garrote from JB neck?

Fibers don't magically transfer into the inside of a knot in the process of trying to undo it.

 

[Bean&Cheese]

An autosomal loci is per definition not X or Y, though.

I have a degree in bioinformatics, but since it’s not verified here, I’ll lean on ncbi for guidance:

INHERITANCE PATTERNS - Understanding Genetics - NCBI Bookshelf

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Ohhhhh yeaaahhhhhh… now I remember! There are 46 chromosomes total, right? 2 of those are sex chromosomes (2 Xs, or 1 X and 1 Y)

 

[Bean&Cheese]

Ohhhhh yeaaahhhhhh… now I remember! There are 46 chromosomes total, right? 2 of those are sex chromosomes (2 Xs, or 1 X and 1 Y)

Duh. Omg hahaha

 

[Bean&Cheese]

And those fibers from the Christmas jacket of PR …,
Maybe she was attempting to remove that garrote from JB neck?

That is a rumor. A few fibers from Patsy’s jacket were found on the duct tape that John had ripped off and put on the basement floor. JonBenet SHOULD have had fibers from her jacket on her (JBR) because she was with her all night and helped put her to bed. Just as the argument can be made for “transfer” DNA, so can it be for the fibers.

 

[Bean&Cheese]

I have read about that, but as far as I understand, it is only considered to be a rumor as nothing similar to this was found by police or taken into the evidence.

But if there were similar objects seen by the housekeeper at the house, I think that there is a possibility that Burke (and John) practiced making knots and tying ropes. Burke was in Scouts and he was into sailing with his father who was in Navy. I have also thought about the possibility if the called "garrote" (not a garrote!) device was actually something that was pre-made and was just lying around at the basement. Only thing that bothers me with that idea is that JonBenet's hair was entangled in the knot. That would indicate that it was not pre-made...

The housekeeper is a nut.

 

[CloudedTruth]

That is a rumor. A few fibers from Patsy’s jacket were found on the duct tape that John had ripped off and put on the basement floor. JonBenet SHOULD have had fibers from her jacket on her (JBR) because she was with her all night and helped put her to bed. Just as the argument can be made for “transfer” DNA, so can it be for the fibers.

What's a rumor?

Fibers from PR's jacket were found in the following places / areas:
Intertwined in the neck ligature.
On the cords around her wrists.
On the inner / sticky side of the duct tape that had covered her mouth.
In the paint tote.
In the materials vacuumed from the wine cellar floor.

Could possibly be explained away as coincidental contact from 1 or 2 places. But having been found in so many areas / places significant to the crime strongly points to her involvement.

 

[CloudedTruth]

You could be right, but it’s also been reported in People that it matched.

“According to Cold Case, there was DNA found in her underwear that also matched what was found under her fingernails. In 2016, 9News reported that the same DNA was found on JonBenét’s long johns — a discovery that led Lacy to believe that police had the killer’s DNA profile.”

I can't put too much significance on People Magazine's reporting when they say "a discovery that led Lacy to believe that police had the killer's DNA profile". She was told by the scientists and the experts who tested the samples that it was in no way definitively the killer's DNA, and that it was just as likely that it was just artifact and completely innocent. She was warned that her exoneration was not based upon what the science indicated, and that basing exoneration on that was ill advised.