Knowing all you know today about this case who do you think really killed JonBenet?

[Linda7NJ]

I think the biggest problem is that I do. This same DNA is used to solve other cases. This same DNA points to someone else being involved in other cases.

Amazing how here it means nothing since it does not support RDI.

If you don't accept the actual evidence you can not solve the case

I realized long ago this case would never be solved.... Unless there is a confession...and I don't foresee that happening.
All I know for sure, it was a Ramsey.

 

[FrayedKnot]

Touch DNA is enough to crack cases..

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/utah-authorities-dna-helped-solve-1995-murder-20317099

"Bonner said Joseph Michael Simpson, who was arrested Tuesday, was "never on our radar" until earlier this year, when a lab extracted "touch DNA" from the granite rocks used to crush the teen's skull."


http://www.whiotv.com/news/news/local/touch-dna-solving-crime/nWPcD/

"The power of Touch DNA to unlock cases first made headlines in Ohio in July of 2009. It helped to solve a gruesome double-murder investigation in Akron. Alan Grna and his mother, Julianna, were found beaten to death in their home."

"Touch DNA has changed the way investigators approach crime scenes looking for evidence."



IT seems everyone is relying on TDNA to solve cases except in this case..

Two cases is not "everyone". That wouldn't be factual.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Then by that same "logic", the touch DNA found doesn't mean ANY of the owners are JonBenet's killers.

And there cannot be two sources for the same DNA. DNA is unique to the individual/source. The source of any DNA is the person to whom it belongs.

So I don't know whay you keep saying "two sources of the same DNA" since that is just not possible. :waitasec:

If, however, you are trying to say that TDNA from the same source was found in two different places on JBR's clothing, then it still isn't significant. She could have picked up someones TDNA on her hand and then in the bathroom transferred it to both her panties and the waistband of her longjohns when pulling them up.

This isn't DNA from blood or semen or even saliva. We are talking skin flakes or dried sweat droplets. They can land anywhere and unlike blood or semen which should never be on a little girl's panties , they are not necessarily nefarious leavings, but amazingly common.


There is no smoking gun in the TDNA, but if there is, as you seem bent on proselytizing, then the TDNA from all SIX sources should be viewed as left by her killers.

And that's just bologna.

It seems that most investigators take ALL DNA seriously. They are excited to find the match and answers to the case.


I think that people have been snowed by all books..

The fact is there was DNA it was mixed with JBR blood and there was a second source that matches none of the R's.

Funny thing is, I bet if it did match the R's people would be screaming... BULLSEYE!

 

[FrayedKnot]

I realized long ago this case would never be solved.... Unless there is a confession...and I don't foresee that happening.
All I know for sure, it was a Ramsey.

I know it's crazy, but I really sort of thought PR would have confessed before her death. I should have known she'd keep up the facade even then.

 

[FrayedKnot]

It seems that most investigators take ALL DNA seriously. They are excited to find the match and answers to the case.


I think that people have been snowed by all books..

The fact is there was DNA it was mixed with JBR blood and there was a second source that matches none of the R's.

Funny thing is, I bet if it did match the R's people would be screaming... BULLSEYE!

Again, I say that there cannot be a SECOND source for the SAME DNA. If DNA comes from another person, then it is not the same DNA. It's not like blood types. The SAME DNA can only have ONE source. The person from whom it came.

Why is that so hard to grasp? Sorry but it's beginning to sound as though you are being deliberately vague.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Two cases is not "everyone". That wouldn't be factual.

IT is, and I have a whole list, I just did not want to muck up the thread with more facts..

http://www.kshb.com/dpp/news/local_news/touch-dna-technology-helped-waldo-rape-case

http://www.uis.edu/innocenceproject/events/touchdna/

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2008/aug/28/ohio-man-sentenced-20-years-rape-naples-girl/

http://www.sorensonforensics.com/fo...a-solves-13-year-old-cold-case-murder-mystery

There are many more.. the only people that seem unimpressed by TDNA are RDIs

 

[redheadedgal]

BBM

Yes, but TV never lies, unlike them dern books with all their highfalutin' words and facts.

:floorlaugh:

 

[Linda7NJ]

Maybe they just dropped by for tea and pineapple?

Yes... Foreign factions always roll with their own pineapple!

Kidnappers who wait until they're in the house to write a three page ransom note, using the homeowners own pad and pen... Tidy too. Even put pen back and used the waste paper basket! they forget to remove the child. Instead they leave the note on the steps.. Feed her pineapple....And go to the basement with the child. Or ... They take the child to the basement, assault and murder the child then... Tip toe back upstairs to leave a note they wrote earlier, while waiting.... Or ... Write the note after she was dead and before leaving.

Makes no sense.

Pedophiles that take children to the basement of their own home to molest. A molester so bend on molesting he can't wait long enough to remove her from the house...yet brought a pineapple to share with JonBenet first!

Loosely bind the wrists purely for effect as they served no purpose.

There is simply too much staging. The entire scene is ridiculous!

 

[FrayedKnot]

Jamieson, who gave evidence in the Reed brothers' and the Omagh bombing trials, says that the forensics community must validate procedures and further investigate the issues that low-copy-number profiling has brought to light, before scientists and courtrooms can have confidence in the results. "The public does not understand that just because your DNA is on an object it does not mean you have touched it," he says. A point of contention in the Reeds' case was whether the Reeds had ever come in direct contact with the plastic knife handles, or whether they might have transferred DNA indirectly through someone else's touch, or, say, by sneezing.

As Budowle says, "with [low-copy-number typing] you can't say what the tissue source is". Scientists, he says, "overstep the line" when interpreting the results of low-copy-number typing in court cases..

BBM

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100317/full/464347a.html

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

BBM

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100317/full/464347a.html

So all these cops are wrong.. All the investigators using Touch DNA to solve decade old cases.. All wrong..

Wow...

Sometimes you just have to accept the truth.

 

[Linda7NJ]

It seems that most investigators take ALL DNA seriously. They are excited to find the match and answers to the case.


I think that people have been snowed by all books..

The fact is there was DNA it was mixed with JBR blood and there was a second source that matches none of the R's.

Funny thing is, I bet if it did match the R's people would be screaming... BULLSEYE!

Why would anyone be screaming bullseye? Most of us here understand the science and it's limitations. It seems you are one of the very few that doesn't.
It would be just one more thing to toss onto the mountain of evidence that already exists and points directly to a Ramsey. No screaming needed.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Again, I say that there cannot be a SECOND source for the SAME DNA. If DNA comes from another person, then it is not the same DNA. It's not like blood types. The SAME DNA can only have ONE source. The person from whom it came.

Why is that so hard to grasp? Sorry but it's beginning to sound as though you are being deliberately vague.

There ya go using those fancy scientific words (source) correctly again! lmao

 

[FrayedKnot]

So all these cops are wrong.. All the investigators using Touch DNA to solve decade old cases.. All wrong..

Wow...

Sometimes you just have to accept the truth.

Excellent advice. And I have. A Ramsey killed her. And one also had been sexually abusing her for some time.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Why would anyone be screaming bullseye? Most of us here understand the science and it's limitations. It seems you are one of the very few that doesn't.
It would be just one more thing to toss onto the mountain of evidence that already exists and points directly to a Ramsey. No screaming needed.

And there is DNA that points away from them... I will go with the science and not whether she had make up on that morning.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Excellent advice. And I have. A Ramsey killed her. And one also had been sexually abusing her for some time.

Just opinion.. DNA says otherwise.

 

[Linda7NJ]

IT is, and I have a whole list, I just did not want to muck up the thread with more facts..

http://www.kshb.com/dpp/news/local_news/touch-dna-technology-helped-waldo-rape-case

http://www.uis.edu/innocenceproject/events/touchdna/

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2008/aug/28/ohio-man-sentenced-20-years-rape-naples-girl/

http://www.sorensonforensics.com/fo...a-solves-13-year-old-cold-case-murder-mystery

There are many more.. the only people that seem unimpressed by TDNA are RDIs

I knew you didn't bother to read the actual unbiased forensic paper detailing the limitations that I linked! I knew it!
If you do not understand the limitations of the science and the importance of understanding that, there is really nothing to discuss.

 

[Linda7NJ]

BBM

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100317/full/464347a.html

You and those pesky facts!

 

[FrayedKnot]

And there is DNA that points away from them... I will go with the science and not whether she had make up on that morning.

If the TDNA belonged to a Ramsey, nobody would shout "bullseye". They'd say "well duh". :facepalm:

OTOH, if we are talking about DNA extracted from blood or semen and it did not match a Ramsey, then you have my attention. But some skin flakes? Notsomuch.

 

[FrayedKnot]

Just opinion.. DNA says otherwise.

Yes. It is just your opinion. The TOUCH DNA says nothing of the sort.

 

[Linda7NJ]

So all these cops are wrong.. All the investigators using Touch DNA to solve decade old cases.. All wrong..

Wow...

Sometimes you just have to accept the truth.

You think all the law enforcement folks that worked the Ramsey case are wrong. You're aware they believe a Ramsey did it, aren't you?

Cases are not all the same.

I am not saying its 100% impossible for that TDNA to be some unknown killer. Sure it could. IMO it's about as likely though, as aliens (space aliens not foreign faction kind) did it.