Discussion of "Overkill - The Unsolved Murder of Jon Benet" doco crime scene footage

[searchinGirl]

Yes, CODIS has standards. Which is why the sample was pushed from 9 to 10 in order to get it into the database; with 10 being the minimum required.

For you to say "If the DNA is irrelevant then it needs to come out of CODIS," is blindly naive or sarcastically insulting. We all know that isn't going to happen.

Where are you headed about CU? I see nothing nefarious about it.

I'm sorry I'm not trying to insult anyone, so maybe I should say the DNA being in CODIS is a legal hurdle that would need to be overcome before anyone else could be prosecuted for the crime. And by the way, the number of markers needed for a CODIS sample was reduced on May 1, 2016 to 8 with a rarity match of greater than 10M:1; still learning about that but I believe it has something to do with heritage/race.

I'm not necessarily headed anywhere about CU; but it does appear that the University is the only entity in Boulder that has benefited from the recent media coverage of JonBenet's murder. The building at CU with the project-build space (22,000 sf) is about half a mile from the Ramsey house; and that building was the law school at the time of the murder - just a coincidence but still gets me thinking. Those are a lot of resources to provide an outside entity like CBS without an academic mission, so I suspect the money came through the CU Foundation. Anyway, CU and the DA's office have a close relationship; I suspect pressure could be applied there.

 

[searchinGirl]

Seems to me that DNA from unsolved crimes are compared against CODIS samples, so it seems that this imaginary psychopath stopped completely after this crime. And no, logic points to that DNA sample being on the panties when they were packaged.

How come no tDNA other than JBs was found in the "crotch cuttings"; and why did none of the panty experiments on TV yield a 10-marker sample.

 

[andreww]

How come no tDNA other than JBs was found in the "crotch cuttings"; and why did none of the panty experiments on TV yield a 10-marker sample.

Maybe they didn't look hard enough. As you already know, the sample was microscopic, not visible to the human eye. Seeing as pieces were cut out of the panties, I assume those were the only areas that were tested. Certainly Lacy's scraping method was not done on the panties, so who knows exactly what is there.

And exactly what TV experiments are you talking about?

And I didn't see a reply to the fibres on the duct tape comment. Im waiting for that.

 

[searchinGirl]

Someone sneezed when the panties were packaged. Explained.

If you are in need of explanations, then explain how Patsy's sweater fibres got all over the duct tape that covered JBs mouth. There is no innocent explanation for that.

Patsy wore the sweater while sitting on the blanket in JB room and no black fibers from her sweater were found on the duct tape. Brown fibers found on the duct tape were never sourced.

 

[searchinGirl]

Maybe they didn't look hard enough. As you already know, the sample was microscopic, not visible to the human eye. Seeing as pieces were cut out of the panties, I assume those were the only areas that were tested. Certainly Lacy's scraping method was not done on the panties, so who knows exactly what is there.

And exactly what TV experiments are you talking about?

And I didn't see a reply to the fibres on the duct tape comment. Im waiting for that.

per the lab report, three separate samples were tested from the panties and combined; results are consistent with the victim.

The experiments on the CBS show with the fresh out-of-the package underwear that showed slight traces of DNA - kinda like the interior samples from JB longjohns.

 

[andreww]

Patsy wore the sweater while sitting on the blanket in JB room and no black fibers from her sweater were found on the duct tape. Brown fibers found on the duct tape were never sourced.

Have you actually seen what the sweater looked like? Was there more black or red on it? How many fibres were found? 3? 100? So if the sweater was 90% red and 5 fibres were found, how many black ones would be there? What colour was the cloth used to wipe her down? Brown? What colour were the gloves worn during the staging? Brown? There are unidentifiable fibres everywhere, especially in a dusty old basement. They mean nothing. Its the ones that you can identify that are important.

 

[salamander23]

Well, you asked... the pdfs at this website are put together from the Bode Technology reports. Questions there pertain to understanding the science further and making the table better. If anyone can answer, I'm listening.

http://linearsight.com/research.html

I made the spreadsheet so that it sorts. I put the matching alleles at the top at the second link; I tried to make it self-explanatory. the profile of "Unknown Male 1" was provided on the Bode Reports with only 9 pairs of alleles. (CODIS requires 10). I'm a database type person. I like to build a report so that it's a picture telling a story.

1. Wow ok I am feeling my way through this... Am I correct in noting that there are no results listed for testing the garrote / paintbrush handle? Just a line that says basically "item not tested at this time" ? Was it ever tested? Anyone know the result?

2. Also, couldn't it be said that all DNA on the exterior of Jonbenet - outside clothing - could just be from anyone that morning in the house? JR, Arndt, A crying neighbor leaning over to console JR, etc... like basically anything could happen dna - wise. A disrupted crime scene....

3. But you could also assume other things - interior of long johns, etc to more reliably tell a story...

4. http://forensicoutreach.com/library...le-doubt-on-burke-as-jonbenet-ramseys-killer/ - This link is one of a few that say there was a drop of blood from a male that is neither JR nor BR... Anyone got anything on this?

 

[ZoriahNZ]

I'm sorry, I don't have any links, but I do recall discussion about a microscopic DNA profile sample being mixed in with JonBenet's blood from the crotch of her Bloomies panties. I don't recall any unknown profiles sourced from blood samples independent of JBR. So, basically, if some panties factory worker (from the Philippines or wherever) sneezed on the area where eventually JBR bled due to the vaginal trauma of that night, their microscopic DNA might end up submitted into evidence.

 

[Miz Adventure]

Someone sneezed when the panties were packaged. Explained.

If you are in need of explanations, then explain how Patsy's sweater fibres got all over the duct tape that covered JBs mouth. There is no innocent explanation for that.

Most tellingly - those fibres were on the sticky side of the duct tape.

 

[searchinGirl]

1. Wow ok I am feeling my way through this... Am I correct in noting that there are no results listed for testing the garrote / paintbrush handle? Just a line that says basically "item not tested at this time" ? Was it ever tested? Anyone know the result?

2. Also, couldn't it be said that all DNA on the exterior of Jonbenet - outside clothing - could just be from anyone that morning in the house? JR, Arndt, A crying neighbor leaning over to console JR, etc... like basically anything could happen dna - wise. A disrupted crime scene....

3. But you could also assume other things - interior of long johns, etc to more reliably tell a story...

4. http://forensicoutreach.com/library...le-doubt-on-burke-as-jonbenet-ramseys-killer/ - This link is one of a few that say there was a drop of blood from a male that is neither JR nor BR... Anyone got anything on this?

1. You are correct in what the reports say about the garotte & paintbrush handle. I believe these are the only actual lab reports released to-date. These reports are from samples taken off the longjohns, her nightgown, and additional areas of the panties.

2. The crime scene was disrupted; but the DNA samples from the exterior waistband of JB longjohns are touch DNA. The profile that was given to the lab to compare the results with was not touch DNA and was mixed with JB blood in her panties that presumably were not exposed to the disrupted crime scene.

3. Not sure what you mean about assuming other things. The interior waistband longjohns samples returned results unsuitable for comparison.

4. As I mentioned above. Blood found in JB panties was was mixed with "unknown male 1" or UM1; the Denver crime lab originally deduced the sample with 9 markers and additional research developed the 10th marker to meet the requirements of CODIS.

 

[BBB167893]

I can't speak about Mary Lacy. I've never liked her and I don't appreciate her exoneration of the Ramseys. She is foolish.

We're on the same page so far.

However, the DNA was submitted to CODIS under threat of sanctions - $250K and permanent loss of access to the database. If IDI is such BS, why would Boulder Justice submit an affidavit to NDIS attributing it to the "putative perpetrator"?

One does not lead to the other. I'm sure Mary Lacy was convinced it did belong to the perp.

And, why are people here so threatened by the DNA being in CODIS?

I can't speak for other people, but I'm not threatened.

 

[BBB167893]

The CODIS sample was submitted in 2003, the longjohns were tested five years later in 2008. It was the Denver crime lab that deduced the 2003 profile.

Your point?

There was no additional foreign tDNA on JonBenet's panties other than that found mixed with her blood.

Not true. There was DNA on the waistband and legbands of the panties, too.

I see the rift between the BPD and the DA as a failure in leadership.

I couldn't have said it better myself!

Say what you will about Mary Lacy/Alex Hunter duties as prosecutors/saboteurs, if a DA can't prosecute due to reasonable doubt already already pervasive in the community, then how to proceed?

How about actually working WITH the BPD?

 

[BBB167893]

Saliva mixed in with her blood and dripped out of her body onto the panties after she was wiped down and redressed. I think the logic points to the perpetrator as being part of the crime scene as a more likely than not scenario.

Not having a "hit" yet means he's not incarcerated or convicted of a felony; it doesn't mean he doesn't exist. There are 15M offender records in CODIS or roughly 10% of the US male population. If ever there is a hit, then I think you will see the pieces of the puzzle fit together.

That's the problem: the pieces already DO fit together. And for that reason, your scenario doesn't work.

 

[BBB167893]

the reason I say the DNA is key is because I don't see how the case can move forward without explaining it; it can't be dismissed as nothing important.

Except the police already did both.

 

[BBB167893]

How come no tDNA other than JBs was found in the "crotch cuttings";

How hard did they look?

and why did none of the panty experiments on TV yield a 10-marker sample.

THIS one didn't yield a 10-marker sample until it was amplified. Even leaving that aside, I imagine it would be a completely random thing. Moreover, THOSE panties didn't have someone else's blood in them.

 

[BBB167893]

Patsy wore the sweater while sitting on the blanket in JB room

How would sitting on a blanket in JB's room account for fibers on duct tape in the basement?!

and no black fibers from her sweater were found on the duct tape.

Her sweater didn't HAVE any black fibers.

Brown fibers found on the duct tape were never sourced.

That we know of. If the police idea about the canvasses is right, though...

 

[searchinGirl]

There was DNA on the waistband and legbands of the panties

Source please?

 

[searchinGirl]

Except the police already did both.

Nope. More testing doesn't invalidate what's been done already.

 

[searchinGirl]

How would sitting on a blanket in JB's room account for fibers on duct tape in the basement?!

Transfer. I have a cute little ugly Christmas sweater that leaves visible fibers everywhere I go. It gets all over my duct tape.

 

[BBB167893]

Source please?

Your wish is my command.

Foreign Faction, p304:

[LaBerge] indicated that the male sample identified in Distal Stain 007-2 was weak, and degraded to begin with, and weaker samples of the same genetic material were found in the waistband and leg bands of the underwear.

I strive to please.