DNA Revisited

[Sophie]

JBR’s skin cells would be present on the long johns. There is simply no way that they would not be.
Additionally, unless PR and JR never touched the waistband it is also not possible that their skin cells would not be present in the area.
This means that a mixture was present.
The only lab report on DNA that anyone in the general public has ever seen states that a mixture involving JR and PR may have accounted for the CODIS “intruder” profile
Bode saw the JR / PR mix on the long johns and declared that they found a match to the profile in CODIS.
The DNA in this case so far would be subject to a devastating attack in court – this is not a DNA case.

Cynic, that is the best capsule summary of the position that I have ever seen! **APPLAUSE**

 

[Sophie]

Just between us, let me just say your statement is impossible.

Intact skin cells recovered from the waistband can't produce hybrid DNA. It represents a unique profile that belongs to one and only one human. That profile then matched the DNA already in CODIS.

This isn't gene splicing.

Where do you get this stuff?

I think you are misunderstanding Cynic's post.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I'd suggest rereading your own link:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/10/earlyshow/main4247767.shtml

Again, there's no such thing as a hybrid DNA. There's no 'JR DNA + PR DNA = CODIS DNA' assertion by anybody connected with this research.

The skin cells produced intact, complete DNA. This is what Bode recovered. It matched was was in CODIS.

 

[cynic]

I'd suggest rereading your own link:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/10/earlyshow/main4247767.shtml

Again, there's no such thing as a hybrid DNA. There's no 'JR DNA + PR DNA = CODIS DNA' assertion by anybody connected with this research.

The skin cells produced intact, complete DNA. This is what Bode recovered. It matched was was in CODIS.

The assertion is from the lab that prepared this report. Just read the sentence. They are saying there are two possible explanations for the unknown male profile.
1. There is a single male donor – a potential “intruder”
2. There is a mixture present (not hybrid ??? ). That mixture can be explained by a combination of two or more of the following: John Andrew Ramsey, Melinda Ramsey, John B. Ramsey, Patricia Ramsey, Burke Ramsey, Jeff Ramsey, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXX,

The DNA profiles developed from exhibits #7, 14L and 14M revealed a mixture of which the major component matched JonBenet Ramsey.
If the minor components from exhibits #7, 14L and 14 M were contributed by a single individual then John Andrew Ramsey, Melinda Ramsey, John B. Ramsey, Patricia Ramsey, Burke Ramsey, Jeff Ramsey, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXX, would be excluded as a source of the DNA analyzed on those exhibits. (By way of explanation: #7 refers to bloodstains from panties. #14L,#14M are right and left hand fingernails from JonBenet Ramsey.) (From a lab report held up by Erin Moriarty on "48 Hours Mystery”)
[ame="http://boards.library.trutv.com/showthread.php?t=290578"]http://boards.library.trutv.com/showthread.php?t=290578[/ame]


Again I say, read my posts all the way through for the foundation and context. You are definitely misunderstanding what a DNA mixture is.
At least look at this and see what you think. (It is from earlier in the thread)
http://www.nfstc.org/pdi/Subject06/images/pdi_s06_m03_06.swf

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

The mixing of DNA seems to not be applicable to these skin cells taken from the longjohns. According to Bode website

http://www.bodetech.com/technologies/touch-dna/touch-dna-overview

Touch DNA is not Low Copy Number (LCN) DNA. LCN DNA profiling allows a very small amount of DNA to be analyzed, from as little as 5 to 20 cells. Because of the small amount of starting DNA in LCN samples, many more cycles of amplification are necessary.

• Touch DNA samples at Bode are processed/amplified exactly the same way as blood, semen, saliva etc, and are therefore admissible in court.


and also from Bode:

How does touch DNA processing differ from low copy number (LCN)? LCN is used on items where only minimal contact has occurred or there are only small quantities of cells/DNA present. Differently from touch DNA processing these samples go through a higher number of PCR cycles which can obtain a DNA profile where conventional PCR would not. LCN work has to be done in special hoods and there is a higher chance of getting mixed profiles. LCN is usually only used on a sample that has already been processed, has an indication of DNA present, but cannot be re-worked any further using standard DNA methods.

and your article

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/10/earlyshow/main4247767.shtml

While the amount of DNA they found was much less than would appear in a stain, there was enough to be processed in the routine way DNA is analyzed, Williamson said. (In other cases, so-called "low copy number DNA" has to be processed in a different way).


Bottom line is this: it seems you might be presenting this as if it were LCN DNA taken from the longjohns when it wasn't. According to the above excerpts, there is no mix to the longjohn DNA. Its a complete DNA profile that was processed the usual way.

The DNA found in blood in JBR's crotch that was already submitted to CODIS matched this profile.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

The assertion is from the lab that prepared this report.

OK I somehow missed your link to this Bode report you're referring to. Who published it? I didn't see it in your posts.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

This almost certainly would reveal a mixed profile DNA sample. (JBR and PR, JR at least, in addition to the “unknown” donor). The number of markers found in the “intruder” DNA profile has never been released to the public.
We have been told that the profile matched that of the panty DNA, so it is relatively safe to assume that the profile also has at least 9 ½ markers. It is also an equally safe assumption that had they found a full 13 loci profile, that an announcement to that effect would have been made. I believe that the Bode lab was simply given the CODIS “intruder” profile to look for and they found it. They quite probably didn’t attempt any sort of further analysis.

Your post: This almost certainly would reveal a mixed profile DNA sample.

IMO this statement appears to be just your own personal view. There also appears to be no Bode report identifying their result as potentially being a mix of JR and PR as you further claimed.

Your post: The number of markers found in the “intruder” DNA profile has never been released to the public.

If you don't know how many markers they have, how do you know anything about
'almost certainly' revealing a mix?

It seems you're claiming what you want to claim in any possible way to show RDI, by not supposing that this mythical mix could also be from three intruders.

 

[cynic]

The mixing of DNA seems to not be applicable to these skin cells taken from the longjohns. According to Bode website

Touch DNA is not Low Copy Number…. LCN work has to be done in special hoods and there is a higher chance of getting mixed profiles… there was enough to be processed in the routine way DNA is analyzed…

Bottom line is this: it seems you might be presenting this as if it were LCN DNA taken from the longjohns when it wasn't. According to the above excerpts, there is no mix to the long john DNA. Its a complete DNA profile that was processed the usual way.

I have not at any time suggested that LCN DNA testing was used in processing either the bloodstain or long john DNA samples.
With every post you make it is clear that you have not read my thread through.
From my “General Background” section:

LCN: Low copy number. DNA samples (typically skin cells) below ideal STR testing range, usually less than .25 nanograms (38 cells). (Tests can be run with as little as 5 to 20 cells.) To obtain a profile, special testing procedures must be used such increasing the the amplification cycles to greater than 28 – usually 34. There are a number of pitfalls, and it has not been well received in courts. Testing introduced in ~2001.
Touch DNA: Touch DNA samples (typically skin cells) are processed/amplified exactly the same way as blood, semen, saliva etc, and can stand up to scrutiny in court much better than LCN DNA. Testing introduced in ~2005.

And from the section on DNA in the long johns:

“While the amount of DNA they found was much less than would appear in a stain, there was enough to be processed in the routine way DNA is analyzed, Williamson said. (In other cases, so-called "low copy number DNA" has to be processed in a different way).”

(By the way, in case you are wondering why Bode is being so defensive about LCN DNA testing, it's because it has been beaten up badly in courts.)

The DNA found in blood in JBR's crotch that was already submitted to CODIS matched this profile.

Bode found a match to the CODIS profile (the bloodstain), not the other way around.

There is a 9 ½ marker profile in CODIS relating to this case. The only inference that can be made from all of the publically released statements relating to what was found by Bode is that they found the same 9 ½ markers and therefore a “match”. There were never any statements that they found 10, 11, 12 or 13 markers – no statement relating to the quality of the profile was ever released. No statement was ever made that they revised or upgraded the CODIS profile to reflect more markers found.

My point is that they have to be sure that the 9 ½ marker profile that is in CODIS is indeed a profile resulting from one person and not a mixture from something as “innocent” as two family members as I suggested earlier.

The DNA profiles developed from exhibits #7, 14L and 14M revealed a mixture of which the major component matched JonBenet Ramsey.
If the minor components from exhibits #7, 14L and 14 M were contributed by a single individual then John Andrew Ramsey, Melinda Ramsey, John B. Ramsey, Patricia Ramsey, Burke Ramsey, Jeff Ramsey, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXX, would be excluded as a source of the DNA analyzed on those exhibits. (By way of explanation: #7 refers to bloodstains from panties. #14L,#14M are right and left hand fingernails from JonBenet Ramsey.) (From a lab report held up by Erin Moriarty on "48 Hours Mystery”)
[ame="http://boards.library.trutv.com/showthread.php?t=290578"]http://boards.library.trutv.com/showthread.php?t=290578" target="_blank">http://boards.library.trutv.com/showthread.php?t=290578[/ame]
[ame="http://boards.library.trutv.com/showthread.php?t=290578"]http://boards.library.trutv.com/showthread.php?t=290578">http://boards.library.trutv.com/showthread.php?t=290578[/ame]


I always looked at this as saying that there was a mix of JonBenet’s blood and an unknown male DNA minor profile, in other words the mystery “intruder” profile.
While true, I overlooked the other possibility which is clearly spelt out:
If it is not a single contributor then a DNA mix involving two of the following people: John Andrew Ramsey, Melinda Ramsey, John B. Ramsey, Patricia Ramsey, Burke Ramsey, and Jeff Ramsey may be what produced the minor profile and not an intruder after all. (At least one of the two people would have to be a male, as there is a Y marker present) This means that the DNA found in the panty blood stain could simply be a mixture of JonBenet’s blood cells and skin cells from JR and PR as one example.
To illustrate, consider the following very simplified 5 marker profile:
JonBenet (5,12), (8,9), (3,3), (6,4), (9,12)
Patsy (5,8), (7,9), (4,3), (6,11), (9,5)
John (3,12), (8,10), (3,6), (8,4), (7,12)

(Note that because I am using JBR’s parents in the example, JBR is receiving one allele from JR and PR at every marker)

The mixed profile from this example found in the bloodstain would be:
(3,5,8,12), (7,8,9,10), (3,4,6), (4,6,8,11), (5,7,9,12)

You then remove the victim profile and are left with the following alleles to explain:
(3.8), (7,10), (4,6), (8,11), (5,7)

The lab is saying that there are two possibilities:
There is an unidentified male with the following profile responsible for DNA found in the blood stain: (3.8), (7,10), (4,6), (8,11), (5,7)
Or, it was from a mixture involving family members.
Clearly it appears that the DA chose to believe that it was an intruder rather than a Ramsey family member.
The following is one possible explanation of how the mixture happened:
John Ramsey breaks a paint brush previously used by Patsy and containing her DNA. The portion of handle now containing both his and Patsy’s DNA (skin cells) is inserted into JBR’s vagina causing a small amount of bleeding. The size 12 panties are put on, and JBR’s blood mixed with JR’s and PR’s DNA is deposited. JR pulls up the long johns which PR admittedly handled earlier and once again a mixture of their DNA is left behind.
The Bode lab simply found and declared a match to the same mixed profile found in the panty underwear sample.

Just to be clear, some may be under the impression that touch DNA from the long johns is the crucial DNA in this case. That is not true. The partial profile in CODIS from the DNA in the panties is the foundation. All other DNA will continue to be compared against that partial profile.
If that profile is wrong because it is merely a blend of alleles from Ramsey family members (probably just PR and JR), then it completely invalidates the “intruder” theory, at least insofar as support from DNA tested to date is concerned.

OK I somehow missed your link to this Bode report you're referring to. Who published it? I didn't see it in your posts.

The link is not to a Bode report. The link is to a lab report held up during an airing of 48 Hours mystery. Members of several forums did “screen captures” of what was held up.
It was a lab involved in testing of the blood stain and fingernail samples. I believe Orchid Cellmark did much of the early testing.
[ame="http://boards.library.trutv.com/showthread.php?t=290578"]Questions about the DNA - Crime Library Message Boards[/ame]

It seems you're claiming what you want to claim in any possible way to show RDI, by not supposing that this mythical mix could also be from three intruders.

A mix from three intruders would certainly be mythical.
As I said before:
The only lab report on DNA that anyone in the general public has ever seen states that a mixture involving JR and PR may have accounted for the CODIS “intruder” profile
Bode saw the JR / PR mix on the long johns and declared that they found a match to the profile in CODIS.



If you don’t think that there was a mixture found on JBR’s long johns then ask yourself the following questions:

• Did PR at any time contact the long johns in the waistband area, and if so, if we assume that she wasn’t wearing gloves would at the very least her skin cell DNA transfer?
• Did JR at any time contact the long johns in the waistband area, and if so, if we assume that he wasn’t wearing gloves would at the very least his skin cell DNA transfer?
• Would JBR by virtue of the long johns being pulled up and down her body, and that they were simply in contact with the skin on her stomach transfer skin cell DNA to the waistband?

If you answered you answered yes at least once (three is the correct answer by the way) then Bode found a mixture, it’s really as simple as that. (I don't think anyone seriously believes that only the "intruder" profile was found)
Why didn’t they say so? Well if I was representing the lab, I wouldn’t necessarily say so either. My job would not be to reveal all the details as it is open criminal case but simply to say that we matched the CODIS profile.

In terms of whether this is some sort of inconceivable theory, again if you can honestly tell me that a mixture possibility is not suggested in the only lab report that anyone in the general public has ever seen, then I will concede that my theory has no merit.

If the minor components from exhibits #7, 14L and 14 M were contributed by a single individual then John Andrew Ramsey, Melinda Ramsey, John B. Ramsey, Patricia Ramsey, Burke Ramsey, Jeff Ramsey, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXX, would be excluded as a source of the DNA analyzed on those exhibits.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

(I don't think anyone seriously believes that only the "intruder" profile was found)

OK nobody seriously believes that only the intruder profile was found. Right.


CNN
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/09/jonbenet.dna/
DNA clears JonBenet's family, points to mystery killer



FOXNEWS
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,379041,00.html
DNA Database Could Lead to JonBenet Ramsey's Killer, Family Holds Out
Hope

MSNBC
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25608543/
Family cleared in JonBenet Ramsey’s death

New DNA test finds no link, DA says in letter to Colorado girl’s father

BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7498819.stm
DNA tests 'clear JonBenet family'

I dunno, but maybe you'd be needing some media source somewhere, heck even a tabloid, that says "mystery DNA really mix of JR and PR DNA". They'd probably buy it.

I wont. I feel I'm too pragmatic to fall for the idea that a mix of JR and PR's DNA would result in a CODIS profile that would then match two more mixes of PR and JR DNA found in two more separate locations. And all while various labs casually watched at least three samples go by as the DNA profile owned by one person.

Even you posted that there is an 'unknown' donor.

Besides, you've given me a GREAT idea that I'm still working on.

 

[cynic]

OK nobody seriously believes that only the intruder profile was found. Right.

CNN
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/09/jonbenet.dna/
DNA clears JonBenet's family, points to mystery killer

...

I wont. I feel I'm too pragmatic to fall for the idea that a mix of JR and PR's DNA would result in a CODIS profile that would then match two more mixes of PR and JR DNA found in two more separate locations. And all while various labs casually watched at least three samples go by as the DNA profile owned by one person.

The media reported what it was given. And didn’t we already discuss the “truth behind the headlines”?



If you don’t think that there was a mixture found on JBR’s long johns then ask yourself the following questions:

• Did PR at any time contact the long johns in the waistband area, and if so, if we assume that she wasn’t wearing gloves would at the very least her skin cell DNA transfer?
• Did JR at any time contact the long johns in the waistband area, and if so, if we assume that he wasn’t wearing gloves would at the very least his skin cell DNA transfer?
• Would JBR by virtue of the long johns being pulled up and down her body, and that they were simply in contact with the skin on her stomach transfer skin cell DNA to the waistband?

If you answered you answered yes at least once (three is the correct answer by the way) then Bode found a mixture, it’s really as simple as that. (I don't think anyone seriously believes that only the "intruder" profile was found)

I didn't catch your answer in the last post. Did I miss it, or is someone dodging the issue???
Do you at least believe that JBR’s profile was found?
If not, you must believe that if Bode were to razor scrape your underwear they would not find your profile? Perhaps you do???

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

The media reported what it was given. And didn’t we already discuss the “truth behind the headlines”?




If you don’t think that there was a mixture found on JBR’s long johns then ask yourself the following questions:

• Did PR at any time contact the long johns in the waistband area, and if so, if we assume that she wasn’t wearing gloves would at the very least her skin cell DNA transfer?
• Did JR at any time contact the long johns in the waistband area, and if so, if we assume that he wasn’t wearing gloves would at the very least his skin cell DNA transfer?
• Would JBR by virtue of the long johns being pulled up and down her body, and that they were simply in contact with the skin on her stomach transfer skin cell DNA to the waistband?

If you answered you answered yes at least once (three is the correct answer by the way) then Bode found a mixture, it’s really as simple as that. (I don't think anyone seriously believes that only the "intruder" profile was found)

I didn't catch your answer in the last post. Did I miss it, or is someone dodging the issue???
Do you at least believe that JBR’s profile was found?
If not, you must believe that if Bode were to razor scrape your underwear they would not find your profile? Perhaps you do???

Lets leave my underwear out of this discussion, OK?

I read somewhere that touch DNA washes out of clothing--don't expect to run clothes thru the laundry and then check for touch DNA.

With that in mind, I rather doubt JR handled the waistband on his 6 year old daughter's longjohns. Further, its an assumption that JBR didn't put on the longjohns when her mom requested her to do so. That would be the most normal scenario for a 6 year old.

However I believe I read here somewhere that PR said she put the longjohns on a sleeping JBR. Is this right?

Anyway, you may believe that a mix of JBR and PR DNA was found in blood in the crotch of JBR's underwear, and was uploaded to CODIS under the guise of DNA belonging to one person. Further, you may believe this same mix was reproduced in two separate locations on JBR's waistband and provided a match to the CODIS DNA.

This belief is not expressed ANYWHERE in the media. Not even the TABLOIDS.

I am doubtful that it is even possible. That if Bode were asked what is the probability that PR DNA + JBR DNA = CODIS DNA they would say zero point zero.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Its an intensely funny spin, to turn 'unknown male DNA' into 'PR and JR DNA mix' and therefore evidence that they both handled JBR's longjohns and underpants that night.

LOL

SD you better scoot over.

 

[cynic]

Lets leave my underwear out of this discussion, OK?

I read somewhere that touch DNA washes out of clothing--don't expect to run clothes thru the laundry and then check for touch DNA.

With that in mind, I rather doubt JR handled the waistband on his 6 year old daughter's longjohns. Further, its an assumption that JBR didn't put on the longjohns when her mom requested her to do so. That would be the most normal scenario for a 6 year old.

However I believe I read here somewhere that PR said she put the longjohns on a sleeping JBR. Is this right?

Anyway, you may believe that a mix of JBR and PR DNA was found in blood in the crotch of JBR's underwear, and was uploaded to CODIS under the guise of DNA belonging to one person. Further, you may believe this same mix was reproduced in two separate locations on JBR's waistband and provided a match to the CODIS DNA.

This belief is not expressed ANYWHERE in the media. Not even the TABLOIDS.

I am doubtful that it is even possible. That if Bode were asked what is the probability that PR DNA + JBR DNA = CODIS DNA they would say zero point zero.

My point was merely that just because there was no mention in the media that anything other than a match to the CODIS intruder profile was found, that that is all that was actually present and found. There is plenty that you can deduce by looking at the circumstances. (Thinking outside the media box.)
In terms of my premise being valid, the “formula” would actually be JR plus PR equals CODIS partial profile. (Because a Y marker is present, indicating a male has to be involved in the mix)
The full mix of skin cells found by Bode in my opinion was from JR, PR, and JBR.
Regardless of whether you believe my theory or not, there is no doubt that at least JBR’s profile was found and excluded by Bode during the course of their analysis. This was not reported anywhere in the media, does that make it untrue?

 

[cynic]

Its an intensely funny spin, to turn 'unknown male DNA' into 'PR and JR DNA mix' and therefore evidence that they both handled JBR's longjohns and underpants that night.

LOL

SD you better scoot over.

I guess you must find the following mixture possibility so hilarious that it renders you speechless. (I am still waiting for a single comment relating to it).
Perhaps you should contact the lab and tell them that their analysis is hysterical.

The DNA profiles developed from exhibits #7, 14L and 14M revealed a mixture of which the major component matched JonBenet Ramsey.
If the minor components from exhibits #7, 14L and 14 M were contributed by a single individual then John Andrew Ramsey, Melinda Ramsey, John B. Ramsey, Patricia Ramsey, Burke Ramsey, Jeff Ramsey, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXX, would be excluded as a source of the DNA analyzed on those exhibits.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I guess you must find the following mixture possibility so hilarious that it renders you speechless.

Yes I do. The reason is because it takes what has been globally presented to the public as 'intruder DNA exhonerating the R's' and spins it into 'JR and PR mix DNA implicating the R's'. That is, suggesting or even proving that they both handled the underwear and longjohns that night.

The DNA profiles developed from exhibits #7, 14L and 14M revealed a mixture of which the major component matched JonBenet Ramsey.
If the minor components from exhibits #7, 14L and 14 M were contributed by a single individual then John Andrew Ramsey, Melinda Ramsey, John B. Ramsey, Patricia Ramsey, Burke Ramsey, Jeff Ramsey, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXX, would be excluded as a source of the DNA analyzed on those exhibits.

OK I've seen this posted a bunch of times and yet I have no idea if its your idea, if its from a report, from a published report, from a handheld report not available on the internet, or even what XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXX means. Maybe if you qualified this a little bit I could respond better.

 

[cynic]

OK I've seen this posted a bunch of times and yet I have no idea if its your idea, if its from a report, from a published report, from a handheld report not available on the internet, or even what XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXX means. Maybe if you qualified this a little bit I could respond better.

I guess I was asking too much to hope that you would ever read my entire thread when you are not even reading individual posts
Just a few posts above I said:
The link is to a lab report held up during an airing of 48 Hours mystery. Members of several forums did “screen captures” of what was held up.
It was a lab involved in testing of the blood stain and fingernail samples. I believe Orchid Cellmark did much of the early testing.

[ame="http://boards.library.trutv.com/showthread.php?t=290578"]Questions about the DNA - Crime Library Message Boards[/ame]

(Scroll down the page and you will see the screen captures.)

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

OK then I guess your theory is that the DNA held in CODIS was used as a standard by which Bode simply looked for a minimal match. That is, you believe that Bode did not produce a greater, independent DNA profile with more markers, even though they said they had enough material to process the DNA in the usual way (not LCN). You further believe that the CODIS DNA may represent the DNA profile of a nonexistent person. It is instead a hybrid or composite of two or more people. Is this right?

 

[BBB167893]

SD you better scoot over.

Just WHAT is that supposed to mean?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Just WHAT is that supposed to mean?

That means RDI has a formidable partner in cynic because he wants to convert 'unknown male DNA' that was widely publicized as 'evidence of an intruder exhonerating the R's'.

Do you know what he/she wants to convert it to?

Evidence that PR and JR handled both the underwear and longjohns the night of the murder!

cynic's theory: (correct me if i'm wrong)

PR DNA mixed with JR DNA = CODIS DNA
Bode Touch DNA = CODIS DNA
Transitive theory: PR DNA mixed with JR DNA = Bode Touch DNA
Therefore, JR and PR handled both underwear and both sides of the lonjohn waistband. There is no intruder DNA, just a misinterpretation of scientific results.

 

[BBB167893]

That means RDI has a formidable partner in cynic because he wants to convert 'unknown male DNA' that was widely publicized as 'evidence of an intruder exhonerating the R's'.

Oh, for a minute I was really mad.

Do you know what he/she wants to convert it to?

Evidence that PR and JR handled both the underwear and longjohns the night of the murder!

That's not the feeling I get.

cynic's theory: (correct me if i'm wrong)

PR DNA mixed with JR DNA = CODIS DNA
Bode Touch DNA = CODIS DNA
Transitive theory: PR DNA mixed with JR DNA = Bode Touch DNA
Therefore, JR and PR handled both underwear and both sides of the lonjohn waistband. There is no intruder DNA, just a misinterpretation of scientific results.

Why are you asking me that? I'm not cynic. You'll have to take it up with him/her.