Forensic evidence

[bettybaby00]

Hi, Night Owl,
That was my previous impression as well. Note, though, that Kolar also adds the bit about "mitochondrial dna". I remembered that aspect of dna coming through a mother. I had to check, though, to see if it was also inherited by a son. Here's the reference from a genealogy site:
Maternal DNA, referred to as mitochondrial DNA or mtDNA, is passed down from mothers to their sons and daughters. It is carried through the female line, however, so while a son inherits his mother’s mtDNA, he does not pass it down to his own children.

Another nod to Burke.

 

[otg]

There is confusion over the type of hair that was reportedly found. Let me add to that confusion with the following offering.

I’ve seen it reported using three different words: auxiliary, axillary, and ancillary. Without seeing the actual lab results, we don’t really know which is correct. It would be as easy for a reporter to get this wrong (if he/she were even able to see the report) as it would be for any one of us.

Auxiliary and ancillary both mean the same thing; and if describing hair, would indicate secondary or subordinate hair. Assumedly this would be any hair besides the hair that grows on the top of our heads (eyebrows, pubic, chest, leg, arm, and yes armpit). Axillary is specific to one certain area -- the axilla, the armpit, or oxter (to some of our British posters). If the lab report said it was axillary, then it came from the armpit. If the report said it was ancillary, it could have been from almost anywhere on the shedder’s body.

Additionally, with information from personal experience, whether or not it is pertinent but nevertheless something to consider is that Patsy had undergone chemotherapy just several years earlier. I don’t know if everyone realizes it, but the chemo that Patsy received caused all of her hair to fall out -- every single eyebrow, eyelash, arm hair, leg hair, head hair, pubic hair, and nose hair on her body. That is why you can look at a person going through chemo and tell, even if they wear a wig (the insurance companies call it a “cranial prosthesis”, but they only pay for one if the person needing it is female), false eyelashes, and painted on eyebrows. After chemo is stopped and the effects begin wearing off, the hair slowly begins growing back. It is not always the same as it was before losing it all. For some, when it begins growing back, it is something they are thrilled to have -- even in places it wasn’t wanted before having lost it. As an example, since the armpit hair is still fragile, thin, and sparse when it begins growing, the person may be reluctant (or at least hesitant) to begin having to shave again. I can’t say this was the case with Patsy, and we don’t know for certain if the dubious hair was axillary, ancillary, or auxiliary. And as gramcracker has so meticulously researched and posted (WTG, gram), it is sometimes difficult to scientifically determine the source of some hairs.

Because of past reporting, we can all find articles that call it different things. And we can also find articles that attribute it variously to a Ramsey or not. Until we know for sure exactly what the lab results are, it is senseless to speculate on its relevance.

All JMHO.

 

[Mama2JML]

From Mark Beckner's deposition in W v. Rs:

"16 Q Where again, if Mr. Wolf were correct,
17 where would this hair sample have been taken from or
18 was it the procedure to take more than one from
19 different parts of the individual's body?
20 A Again, it depends on your crime scene. As
21 far as when you say procedure or policy, it's all
22 dependent on your crime scene.
23 Q Well, understanding you have the knowledge
24 of the crime scene here. Chris Wolf is asked to give
25 hair samples. Where would you have taken the samples*
57*
1 from in terms of his body?
2 A Well, there are a number of locations you
3 could take. You could take pubic hairs, you could
4 take head hairs.
5 Q Yeah, I understand. I understand that
6 there are a number of locations. But I'm asking in
7 terms of your investigation of this murder, with the
8 knowledge you have of this crime scene --
9 A Um-hum.
10 Q -- if you want hair samples from Chris
11 Wolf, where would they have been taken from? Would
12 they have been taken from his head? His chest? His
13 underarm? His pubic area? Or all of those?
14 A I would think probably pubic area and head
15 hair.
16 MR. MILLER: Can we take a break?"​

 

[Mama2JML]

From the deposition of Steve Thomas in W v. Rs:

"Q. You don't want me to go there. The -- as I understand it, there was a beaver hair, what was
identified as a beaver hair, found on the duct tape?

A. FBI lab identified a hair or fiber from the adhesive side of the duct tape as a beaver hair.

Q. Were you aware that Mr. Ainsworth, Detective Ainsworth, went through the Ramseys'closets in
June of 1997 and taped all the closets for hairs and that no beaver hair was found?

A. Yes, but that's not surprising."​

 

[bettybaby00]

How does Beckner's deposition confirm "it was a pubic hair?" And, I agree with ST, not surprising 6 months after the fact.

Can someone refresh me on the info regarding when the house was painted and re-carpeted TIA

 

[aussiesheila2]

I was under the impression that it was from her arm possibly her forearm. Dont know about u ladies n gents but I've seen some hairy arms on women. Sometimes its dark as well.

That may well be but I don't think forearms with hairs on them like a male Caucasian's pubic hairs were a desirable trait on the beauty pageant circuits. I would go so far as to say that any beauty with forearms like that would have been eliminated in the first round, certainly not winning any titles as Patsy did.

 

[aussiesheila2]

Hi, Night Owl,
That was my previous impression as well. Note, though, that Kolar also adds the bit about "mitochondrial dna". I remembered that aspect of dna coming through a mother. I had to check, though, to see if it was also inherited by a son. Here's the reference from a genealogy site:
Maternal DNA, referred to as mitochondrial DNA or mtDNA, is passed down from mothers to their sons and daughters. It is carried through the female line, however, so while a son inherits his mother’s mtDNA, he does not pass it down to his own children.

So you also believe that a woman who won numerous female beauty contests did so in spite of having forearms with hairs on them that resembled hairs in a Caucasian male's pubic area? You must because that is where the hair was originally stated by CBI as having come from. It is only since 2000 when it was found not to have matched John Ramsey that it morphed into an 'ancillary' hair and therefore likely to have come from Patsy. It appears that BPD lost interest in checking out exactly who it came from and just passed it off as one of Patsy's hairs IMO

 

[aussiesheila2]

So what is MSM? Where is the bias in a CBI report? What are you talking about ?

 

[bettybaby00]

MSM=main stream media, which is who I believe is biased, not a CBI report.

 

[gramcracker]

guessing that the posts referring to PR having hair on her arm similar in appearance to pubic hair are positing that all PH is curly. which is not true

 

[bettybaby00]

So you also believe that a woman who won numerous female beauty contests did so in spite of having forearms with hairs on them that resembled hairs in a Caucasian male's pubic area? You must because that is where the hair was originally stated by CBI as having come from. It is only since 2000 when it was found not to have matched John Ramsey that it morphed into an 'ancillary' hair and therefore likely to have come from Patsy. It appears that BPD lost interest in checking out exactly who it came from and just passed it off as one of Patsy's hairs IMO

BBM
what is the source of that?

 

[bettybaby00]

guessing that the posts referring to PR having hair on her arm similar in appearance to pubic hair are positing that all PH is curly. which is not true

:giggle:

 

[aussiesheila2]

Sorry, this is in reply to otg post #802
Doing this on my phone. Not v well

Well the CBI report in 1997 was pretty unequivocal. It doesn't appear there was any confusion on their part. They identified it as a male Caucasian pubic hair. Besides I just don't see how that could be confused with a female ancillary hair. Well certainly not a beauty queen woman such as Patsy. There is no way she had forearm hairs that remotely resembled a male Caucasian's pubic hairs. And even if it was possible that her underarm hairs bore some remote resemblance to pubic hairs there would have been the tell tale signs of cut ends from shaving which would have been detectable by the CBI microscopes.

 

[aussiesheila2]

Thanks bettyb - and I agree with you MSM not reliable

 

[aussiesheila2]

BBM
what is the source of that?

Henry Lee got the pubic hair mitoDNA profile from a British forensics lab in 2000

 

[questfortrue]

I never stated a personal tightly held belief about the hair, simply replied to Night Owl of a past impression/recollection. As far as an "unequivocal" report from CBI about the hair, not true. CBI did change their mind and suggest it might not be pubic hair at all, but "ancillary" hair. This info from IRMA nook edition, pg. 146. Since Thomas was still on the job then, the change of mind occurred prior to his resignation in August 1998. The FBI was willing to test the hair in their lab, but the R team were insisting on being present for the testing, and the FBI balked at this request.

Last I read in IRMA, attorney D from the DA's office blocked further testing of the hair by the FBI. No explanation provided.

 

[questfortrue]

How does Beckner's deposition confirm "it was a pubic hair?" And, I agree with ST, not surprising 6 months after the fact.

Can someone refresh me on the info regarding when the house was painted and re-carpeted TIA

The home was turned back to the R’s after an 8-day search, after the homicide. According to ST in IRMI, Detective G and he drove to the home to have a look around, they encountered carpenters, painting contractors, and a cleaning crew. No specific date given, but given the status of their investigation it was within the first 2-3 months of 1997.
See article: http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=skxNAAAAIBAJ&sjid=pDMDAAAAIBAJ&pg=3825,19731

The second review of the home which included Ainsworth taping the R family closets for fur occurred in late June 1997.

IMO, ST's reaction is understandable since he and Detective G witnessed the hired contractors' "scouring" of the home.

 

[aussiesheila2]

I never stated a personal tightly held belief about the hair, simply replied to Night Owl of a past impression/recollection. As far as an "unequivocal" report from CBI about the hair, not true. CBI did change their mind and suggest it might not be pubic hair at all, but "ancillary" hair. This info from IRMA nook edition, pg. 146. Since Thomas was still on the job then, the change of mind occurred prior to his resignation in August 1998. The FBI was willing to test the hair in their lab, but the R team were insisting on being present for the testing, and the FBI balked at this request.

Last I read in IRMA, attorney D from the DA's office blocked further testing of the hair by the FBI. No explanation provided.

What is IRMA please? Do you have the actual quote re CBI 'change of mind'?

Also where did you get info re FBI being willing to retest but blocked by attorney D? I thought I had read everything to do with the case but I've never heard of this before. Are you sure you're not confusing this with some earlier DNA testing when samples were sent to Cellmark for further testing after previously having been sent to CBI?
TIA

Edit - ok so IRMA is ST's book. I don't have it with me at the moment but when I do I'll go and check

 

[Mama2JML]

What is IRMA please? Do you have the actual quote re CBI 'change of mind'?

Also where did you get info re FBI being willing to retest but blocked by attorney D? I thought I had read everything to do with the case but I've never heard of this before. Are you sure you're not confusing this with some earlier DNA testing when samples were sent to Cellmark for further testing after previously having been sent to CBI?
TIA

Edit - ok so IRMA is ST's book. I don't have it with me at the moment but when I do I'll go and check

IRMI, p. 135-136:

"We were all concerned about that unidentified pubic hair the lab found on the white blanket that was wrapped around JonBenet, for it opened the possibility that a sexual attack had taken place and the hair was left behind by the killer. Despite Team Ramsey's claim that the hair belonged to the unknown intruder, in reality it may have come from a huge number of sources.

However, it could be meaningless and of innocent origin. A former FBI profiler explained that there are always 'artifacts' at a crime scene and that not every cigarette butt or beer can is related to the murder.

Nevertheless, it became the subject of a thorough investigation all its own. Detective Trujillo reported that the Colorado Bureau of Investigation concluded it did not come from John or Patsy Ramsey.

Later the CBI lab suggested that it might not be a pubic hair at all but an 'ancillary' hair that could have come from someone's arm, chest, or other area of the body. FBI testing was delayed because Team Ramsey wanted their own people to watch any such examination, which the FBI would not allow.

When I thought of the pubic hair, I vividly remembered the shock of discovering that a number of visitors to the Ramsey home had stayed as overnight guests, and some had slept in the bed of JonBenet. Any of them could have been the source of the mysterious hair.

I first came across that line of investigation in an interview with Brad Millard, a college friend of John Andrew Ramsey. We routinely asked if he had ever been in the Ramsey home in Boulder. Not only had he been there, but he even spent a night in JonBenet's bed, he said. I felt like breaking my pen. With a simple fluke question, a young man volunteered that he had slept in the victim's bed! How many other guests had slept there?" (Thomas, 2000)​

 

[Blue Bottle 01]

How many other guests had slept there?" (Thomas, 2000)

[modsnip]