DNA Revisited

[MurriFlower]

I hardly think that LHP's profile would be categorized as innocent. I may not be as hard on LE as some here are, but I really can't see them dismissing forensic evidence from LHP.

As she did the laundry and probably took the clean clothes back to their place, it's probable. However, we'll never know if her DNA was found there and dismissed will we?

 

[cynic]

As she did the laundry and probably took the clean clothes back to their place, it's probable. However, we'll never know if her DNA was found there and dismissed will we?

She may have laundered the long johns, but the panties were allegedly new, from a package. There would be no reason why she would have had innocent contact with those.

 

[WHITEFANG]

How many people were polygraphed altogether in this case? Was LHP given one?

 

[DeeDee249]

As she did the laundry and probably took the clean clothes back to their place, it's probable. However, we'll never know if her DNA was found there and dismissed will we?

LHP did the R's laundry right in their own home. She didn't take them to her own home to launder and bring back. LHP told LE that when she would arrive in the morning, Patsy already had JB's bed stripped and the wet sheets in the washer. The white blanket was always washed in the basement, usually by LHP, because it didn't fit in the smaller washer outside JB's bedroom. She did most of the rest of the family's laundry in the basement- apparently there was a laundry chute that Patsy and JR used. She said the home had no hampers and dirty clothes that weren't put in the launder chute were dropped on the floor. The kids always just dropped their dirty clothes wherever they took them off. Patsy was questioned about this and said the same thing.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

She may have laundered the long johns, but the panties were allegedly new, from a package. There would be no reason why she would have had innocent contact with those.

Maybe you should read your own post: the long johns were laundered and the panties were new. How does matching DNA get on both the inside crotch and the waistband? According to Bode, touch DNA comes out in the laundry--the're not so successful when testing laundered clothing.

Also, who was the criminal that handled these clothing items that night? You're answer: PR and/or JR is the criminal and deposited someone elses DNA while doing so, without depositing their own. Not just once or twice, but thrice. Have I got this right? And if so, how absurd is this?

My suggestion for RDI is to include an intruder owner of DNA. That is, if you still want the R's to be guilty, then you'll be needing a co-conspirator DNA owner.

 

[cynic]

Maybe you should read your own post: the long johns were laundered and the panties were new. How does matching DNA get on both the inside crotch and the waistband? According to Bode, touch DNA comes out in the laundry--the're not so successful when testing laundered clothing.

Also, who was the criminal that handled these clothing items that night? You're answer: PR and/or JR is the criminal and deposited someone elses DNA while doing so, without depositing their own. Not just once or twice, but thrice. Have I got this right? And if so, how absurd is this?

My suggestion for RDI is to include an intruder owner of DNA. That is, if you still want the R's to be guilty, then you'll be needing a co-conspirator DNA owner.

Proven in the lab and in the field, I've posted the sources multiple times.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Proven in the lab and in the field, I've posted the sources multiple times.

Your claim that someone can successfully deposit someone else's touch DNA three times in succession without depositing any of their own touch DNA...has not been proven in the lab or the field.

I suggest you have misinterpreted the results, if that is what you believe.

I further suggest that we make up our minds: was JR and PR DNA present and 'dismissed' by people who are making up their minds unilaterally on what is and isn't innocent forensic evidence? Or was JR and PR DNA not present on the underwear, and so they were unwitting hosts to unknown male DNA? Or are we going to leave both these options open, so long as RDI?

 

[cynic]

How many people were polygraphed altogether in this case? Was LHP given one?

The only one I've heard of is Glenn Meyer, the guy who rented a basement room in the home of the Barnhills.
(In terms of an LE administered polygraph, that is.)

 

[DeeDee249]

Your claim that someone can successfully deposit someone else's touch DNA three times in succession without depositing any of their own touch DNA...has not been proven in the lab or the field.

I suggest you have misinterpreted the results, if that is what you believe.

I further suggest that we make up our minds: was JR and PR DNA present and 'dismissed' by people who are making up their minds unilaterally on what is and isn't innocent forensic evidence? Or was JR and PR DNA not present on the underwear, and so they were unwitting hosts to unknown male DNA? Or are we going to leave both these options open, so long as RDI?

I'd say the parents' DNA HAD to be there. Patsy pulled the longjohns up on an allegedly sleeping JB. Even if JB wasn't asleep I am sure Patsy helped her get ready for bed. JR carried her up with his hands around her waist. And if you are RDI, you'd probably believe that JR redressed her as his shirt fibers are inside the panties, so he'd have pulled the lohgjohns up as down.

 

[cynic]

Your claim that someone can successfully deposit someone else's touch DNA three times in succession without depositing any of their own touch DNA...has not been proven in the lab or the field.

I suggest you have misinterpreted the results, if that is what you believe.

I further suggest that we make up our minds: was JR and PR DNA present and 'dismissed' by people who are making up their minds unilaterally on what is and isn't innocent forensic evidence? Or was JR and PR DNA not present on the underwear, and so they were unwitting hosts to unknown male DNA? Or are we going to leave both these options open, so long as RDI?

I haven't misinterpreted anything. You are ignoring the reality of the foibles of this type of evidence.
Both options are most certainly open, as they are both viable. Those are far from the only possibilities, I might add.
I'll repeat myself, yet again, this DNA has the same liabilities that hair and fiber evidence has. We are not talking blood or semen.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I haven't misinterpreted anything. You are ignoring the reality of the foibles of this type of evidence.
Both options are most certainly open, as they are both viable. Those are far from the only possibilities, I might add.
I'll repeat myself, yet again, this DNA has the same liabilities that hair and fiber evidence has. We are not talking blood or semen.

Right. How about the one possibility where the owner of some skin cells actually touched JBR's underwear AND longjohns between the time they were laundered/packaged and the time JBR's underwear was swabbed/scraped? How about that one, huh?

At least then we can move from scenarios on how PR touched some clothes and unwittingly left an unknown males DNA on it without leaving her own, three times. If there are more possibilities, fine. But please spare me that one, at least. I'm more interested in whats plausible, not astronomically possible.

 

[cynic]

Right. How about the one possibility where the owner of some skin cells actually touched JBR's underwear and longjohns between the time they were laundered/packaged and the time JBR's underwear was swabbed/scraped? How about that one, huh?

At least then we can move from scenarios on how PR touched some clothes and unwittingly left an unknown males DNA on it without leaving her own, three times. If there are more possibilities, fine. But please spare me that one, at least.

Just because you don't wish to accept the absolute fact that secondary transfer is a path for DNA, that does not make it untrue. I'm sorry if doesn't fit into your framework of what may have happened that night.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Just because you don't wish to accept the absolute fact that secondary transfer is a path for DNA, that does not make it untrue. I'm sorry if doesn't fit into your framework of what may have happened that night.

Apology accepted.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Just because you don't wish to accept the absolute fact that secondary transfer is a path for DNA, that does not make it untrue. I'm sorry if doesn't fit into your framework of what may have happened that night.

Of course secondary transfer is a path for DNA. I never claimed it wasn't. However, secondary transfer as a path for THIS DNA is another story entirely. The odds of secondary transfer went way down with the discovery of matching touch DNA in two (2) separate locations on the waistband. Bode does not discuss the probabilty that this DNA in two locations was by secondary transfer.

You're the only one doing that. Also, your extensive list of postulates exclude direct transfer by DNA owner.

 

[cynic]

Of course secondary transfer is a path for DNA. I never claimed it wasn't. However, secondary transfer as a path for THIS DNA is another story entirely. The odds of secondary transfer went way down with the discovery of matching touch DNA in two (2) separate locations on the waistband. Bode does not discuss the probabilty that this DNA in two locations was by secondary transfer.

You're the only one doing that.

I have sourced DNA experts who have spent a great deal of time researching DNA transfer issues specifically. I might be one of the few people quoting their work, as it generally is found exclusively in forensic journals and periodicals.
DNA in three locations may be remarkable to you, but it is not.
In addition to the lab work that illustrates this, the Janelle Patton case shows it to be true in the field.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I have sourced DNA experts who have spent a great deal of time researching DNA transfer issues specifically. I might be one of the few people quoting their work, as it generally is found exclusively in forensic journals and periodicals.
DNA in three locations may be remarkable to you, but it is not.
In addition to the lab work that illustrates this, the Janelle Patton case shows it to be true in the field.

While you're arguments seem to rely on the existence of DNA dust, floating about here and there like fibers in the laundry basket, I am stuck here in reality where I want to know HOW the DNA from an UNKNOWN MALE was deposited on two separate articles of clothing that JBR was wearing at the time she was murdered.

While you are satisfied with the random DNA dust, I am not. I wish to know, even if innocent, how this DNA came to be there.

In reality, how does someone's skin cells get onto someone elses clothes? What are the scenarios, from most to least likely?

 

[cynic]

While you're arguments seem to rely on the existence of DNA dust, floating about here and there like fibers in the laundry basket, I am stuck here in reality where I want to know HOW the DNA from an UNKNOWN MALE was deposited on two separate articles of clothing that JBR was wearing at the time she was murdered.

While you are satisfied with the random DNA dust, I am not. I wish to know, even if innocent, how this DNA came to be there.

In reality, how does someone's skin cells get onto someone elses clothes? What are the scenarios, from most to least likely?

Do we know how the DNA got to where it was found in the JP case? No, because we are not "all-seeing" and "all-knowing."
Hand-to-hand-to-clothing is a typical secondary transfer path, that is one possibility. It could also be down to carelessness resulting in contamination. There are other possibilities as well.
IDI seems to have no problem with scenarios involving innocent fiber transfer, as this type of DNA has the same issues, the same type of possibilities exist.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

In reality, how does someone's skin cells get onto someone elses clothes? What are the scenarios, from most to least likely?

Do we know how the DNA got to where it was found in the JP case? No, because we are not "all-seeing" and "all-knowing."
Hand-to-hand-to-clothing is a typical secondary transfer path, that is one possibility. It could also be down to carelessness resulting in contamination. There are other possibilities as well.
IDI seems to have no problem with scenarios involving innocent fiber transfer, as this type of DNA has the same issues, the same type of possibilities exist.

My question was straighforward. Your answer seems to evade and thus conceal the most likely scenarios.

Why is that? Why do you feel the need to do that?

Is anyone else able to answer my question, but without circumventing or concealing information?

 

[WHITEFANG]

e. He has never discussed it publicly.

15 He has refused to do so. Don Foster was not

16 rejected by the Boulder District Attorney's office

17 because he sought publicity. Don Foster was

18 rejected because he concluded, after being hired

19 by Steve Thomas, that Patsy Ramsey was the author

20 of the note, and they thereafter found out that

21 he had, prior to being hired by the Boulder

22 District Attorney's office, written a three-page

23 letter to Patsy Ramsey stating unequivocally that

24 he would stake his stake his reputation on her innocence

25 that she was not the author of the note.

 

[WHITEFANG]

JR : I will tell you what

2 my feeling is, and I have said this a number of

3 times, that we need a law in this country that

4 prevents the police from talking to the media

5 about evidence in an ongoing case.

6 We have bypassed the constitutional

7 provisions that have been put in place to protect

8 people's rights when the police could disclose

9 evidence to the media for entertainment.

10 It is a law in England. If some of

11 the things that the media had done in this

12 country and that the police had done in Boulder

13 had been done in England, they would be in jail.

14 It is a simple law. I think we need that in

15 our society.

The statement found above was made by the person found guilty of this heinous murder, until he's proven innocent. Due to his conviction, we discredit and discount every word that comes out of his mouth. Remember, the most crucial point about this is simple. This convicted murderer does nothing but lie. He has no credibility whatsoever, ever.