IDIs On This Forum?

[Ames]

Why bother posting here since all this chit-chat is just that ... somebody's word .... it means nothing concerning anything about JonBenet's death as far as being forensically reliable. For the purposes of discussing the case on this board, I will assume Mr. Levin is truthful until shown otherwise.

Me too...

 

[Jayelles]

Whatever happened to Fenton? He/she started this thread and then ...vanished. Did you all frighten him/her away?

 

[rashomon]

The depo doesn't 'imply Mr. Levin has access to that type of knowledge'.

The depo makes it very clear Mr. Levin claimed to have a report on fiber evidence that he had refused to share. What you had in 2000 and appear to be relying on today is just somebody's word there is a match.

What you don't have is an impartial scientific comparison. Somebody's word isn't a valid source for a scientific match from one item to another.

Levin himself said he personally was at the CBI lab to get the report.
In the 8/2000 interview with John Ramsey, the persons acting on behalf of the Unites States were

10 On behalf of The United States:
11 MICHAEL KANE, Esq.
12 BRUCE LEVIN, Esq.
13 MITCH MORRISSEY, Esq.
14 MARK R. BECKNER
15 TOM WICKMAN
16 TOM TRUJILLO
17 JANE HARMER

So you seriously believe that all these people conspired to frame John Ramsey with non-existing fiber evidence against him?
(Levin btw was under no obligation to share any forensic evidence with the Ramseys.)

For the purposes of discussing the case on this board, I will assume Mr. Levin is truthful until shown otherwise.

I will assume the same.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

OK well then I should apply the same rule and assume this report to be correct also:

"forensic scientists in Colorado now have a complete DNA profile of the killer."

 

[Ames]

OK well then I should apply the same rule and assume this report to be correct also:

"forensic scientists in Colorado now have a complete DNA profile of the killer."

I assume that just because John's shirt fibers were found in her crotch area....that they can't arrest him just on that, because that doesn't prove that he was the KILLER. That just proves that somehow his shirt fibers arrived on her crotch area, somehow or another. (John could easily explain in court that were just transfered somehow. Or that he FORGOT..that she actually DID get up in the middle of the night, to go to the bathroom, and then he wiped her). I am certain that there woudn't be a conviction just based on that.

 

[Solace]

OK well then I should apply the same rule and assume this report to be correct also:

"forensic scientists in Colorado now have a complete DNA profile of the killer."

Well now that is not what you should assume. They have a profile of a man. Not necessarily the killer. It is male DNA. That is all they could glean from the testing. That sounds like something Erin Moriarity might say or Michael Tracy and we all know how reliable they are.

 

[JMO8778]

OK well then I should apply the same rule and assume this report to be correct also:

"forensic scientists in Colorado now have a complete DNA profile of the killer."

and the FBI's profile of the killer is quite different.it isn't based on artifact DNA.

 

[JMO8778]

Does anyone have any thoughts on why John would insist the hands were tied close together when they were obviously free of eachother with a lot of room in between.

he forgot to restage the ligatures when he restaged the rest of her body ! that's why he lied and said they were tied tight,when in fact they were not.

 

[JMO8778]

Uh, IMO the tape and cord were bought by the perp and brought with him in a botched kidnapping turned murder.

the cord and tape were probably all used up,they came from within the house,not brought in by an intruder...we know the tape was previously used and came from off of something else.....and so none was left.

 

[UKGuy]

OK well then I should apply the same rule and assume this report to be correct also:

"forensic scientists in Colorado now have a complete DNA profile of the killer."

Holdontoyourhat,

I suspect you know the latter phrase does not follow directly from the first, since the killer's identity and the identity matching the dna profile may be two entirely different people.

The fiber evidence discovered on JonBenet's body is similar to the unidentified dna, on its own it does not prove that the person's depositing said evidence are one and the same as the killer.

Fiber evidence is never conclusive, similarly Patsy's fibers, neither tell us who killed JonBenet, also the forensic scientists have left out any unidentified fibers discovered either on the tape, or JonBenet's body, this further underlines the dna's status.

Normally fiber evidence is inconclusive and cannot provide a direct match, but in the case of John's Israeli shirt the coincidence of similar fibers arriving via an intruder are remote.

What is extremely damaging to the credibility of John Ramsey's account is that the fibers were found on JonBenet's underwear and genitals, and after she had been wiped down, and likely redressed in the size-12 underwear.

This places John Ramsey or someone wearing his shirt at the scene of the crime!



.

 

[BOESP]

Whatever happened to Fenton? He/she started this thread and then ...vanished. Did you all frighten him/her away?

Grrrrrrr .... <that's an angry Bichon scarring away posters> :blowkiss:

 

[BOESP]

OK well then I should apply the same rule and assume this report to be correct also:

"forensic scientists in Colorado now have a complete DNA profile of the killer."

Did this quotation come from a media source or from a deposition?

 

[Solace]

Did this quotation come from a media source or from a deposition?

Just as I suspected, it is the one and only 48Hours:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/16/48hours/main661569.shtml

Read all about it.

Holdon,

You have to stop quoting 48 Hours - they are just not reliable. Erin and Michael and Austin and Trip.

Holdon,

Since you are an avid fan of the Ramseys and believe they are being UNJUSTLY targeted, what do you think about Tracy unjustly targeting the gentlemen in his documentary - you know the man who was accused by Tracy and the man that Tracy lied about - the man that the Boulder PD said they were not looking at - the one that Tracy said was a suspect in her murder and never was. The one whose life was basically ruined by Tracy and the one I hope is suing Tracy as we speak.

It is one thing to believe in the Ramsey's innocence and it is another to do very little research and echo those who have done nothing but damage to other people in this case for their own personal gain - Ms. Moriarity is right up there with Tracy, although no one really matches Tracy.

Here is another example of how 48 hours misreports:

"Augustin and Gray are convinced that the DNA sample belongs to JonBenet's killer, because of a small amount of matching DNA that also was found under the 6-year-old murder victim's fingernails."

There is no matching DNA. See these people just lie and Erin just reports the lies.

I thought we went over this already.

 

[BOESP]

Just as I suspected, it is the one and only 48Hours:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/16/48hours/main661569.shtml

Read all about it.

Holdon,

You have to stop quoting 48 Hours - they are just not reliable. Erin and Michael and Austin and Trip. <snipped for brevity>

That's what I thought. I don't equate the quality of a "media source" statement with statements made in a depo.

Thanks!

 

[coloradokares]

Did this quotation come from a media source or from a deposition?

I dont see how that is even possibleand nothing that DA Lacey admits to at all. In fact she said in her news conerence when they released Karr it was highly degraded but even given that Karr did not match they had to check it out even though the DNA most likley artifact DNA and not related, but that all possibilities had to be checked out cause they had this confession as unlikly as it was and indeed it proved to be bogus!!

 

[rashomon]

Normally fiber evidence is inconclusive and cannot provide a direct match,

Fiber evidence can be very conclusive.

 

[BOESP]

I dont see how that is even possibleand nothing that DA Lacey admits to at all. In fact she said in her news conerence when they released Karr it was highly degraded but even given that Karr did not match they had to check it out even though the DNA most likley artifact DNA and not related, but that all possibilities had to be checked out cause they had this confession as unlikly as it was and indeed it proved to be bogus!!

Hi CK - I was referring to the fiber evidence someone tried to discredit by using a media statement, saying that fiber evidence analysis was not necessarily "forensic evidence" just because it was stated to be so in a deposition. I fully agree this is not a DNA case. Unsourced, degraded DNA is not going to solve anything but it makes a great red herring. :dance:

 

[UKGuy]

Fiber evidence can be very conclusive.

rashomon,

Really so if two people wear similar jackets purchased from the same store are checked to see if they match forensically and the fiber analysis says yes, what do you then conclude?

Fiber analysis is a statistical procedure since there are few pure fibers, they are usually a mix. In court the defense can play on this.


.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,

Really so if two people wear similar jackets purchased from the same store are checked to see if they match forensically and the fiber analysis says yes, what do you then conclude?

UKGuy,

we are talking about the relevance of fiber evidence in criminal cases. What are the odds that two people wearing jackets bought from the same store are BOTH considered as suspects who may have left fiber evidence back in incriminating locations at the scene of the crime?

Fiber analysis is a statistical procedure since there are few pure fibers, they are usually a mix. In court the defense can play on this.

Fiber analysis is no statistical procedure, but is conducted in a forensics lab which uses chemical and physical tests to determine the nature of the fibers.
The fibers themselves are not 'a mix', but garments can be made of a mix of fibers.
Example: men's shirts are frequently made of a mix of fibers: 35 &#37; cotton fibers, 65 % polyester fibers.

 

[coloradokares]

Hi CK - I was referring to the fiber evidence someone tried to discredit by using a media statement, saying that fiber evidence analysis was not necessarily "forensic evidence" just because it was stated to be so in a deposition. I fully agree this is not a DNA case. Unsourced, degraded DNA is not going to solve anything but it makes a great red herring. :dance:

...


Ok I thought it said DNA :waitasec: