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

[ScarlettScarpetta]

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.

I do believe that the BPD Made a huge mess of this case. I bet there was a lot of evidence lost or destroyed.

This DNA with 2 different sources of the same DNA, Shows that someone was there. It is more than just possible it was an unknown person that did this to JBR.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

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

THE TDNA puts someone else there.

 

[Linda7NJ]

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.

But your not going with the science.

You chose Mary Lacy.

You will never find a forensic scientist that will back up your claim that the TDNA in this case clears the Ramsey's. THAT will never happen.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I do believe that the BPD Made a huge mess of this case. I bet there was a lot of evidence lost or destroyed.

This DNA with 2 different sources of the same DNA, Shows that someone was there. It is more than just possible it was an unknown person that did this to JBR.

I'm going to help you out because again you keep using the wrong word....

What you are TRYING to say is TDNA from the same SOURCE was found in two different PLACES.

You're welcome.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

But your not going with the science.

You chose Mary Lacy.

You will never find a forensic scientist that will back up your claim that the TDNA in this case clears the Ramsey's. THAT will never happen.

No I am going with science. DNA of two sources on the same body of a little girl that is found brutally murdered and none of it matches her family or known tested people.

Science says someone left that there.

 

[Linda7NJ]

THE TDNA puts someone else there.

Secondary transfer. Look it up.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I'm going to help you out because again you keep using the wrong word....

What you are TRYING to say is TDNA from the same SOURCE was found in two different PLACES.

You're welcome.

No I am not.. It is the same thing.. I am pretty sure people reading it can get the meaning of the sentence.

 

[Linda7NJ]

THE TDNA puts someone else there.

And 5 other unknown people.

Alrighty then.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Secondary transfer. Look it up.

So funny, No one thinks the fibers are secondary transfer, No one thinks things that lead to the R's in there scenario is secondary transfer..
But this must be???

IT is being used to solve cases, until we know who this DNA belongs to, It is every indication that someone was there that was an unknown intruder.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

And 5 other unknown people.

Alrighty then.

There only has to be one match to the murderer.

 

[SapphireSteel]

Isn't there an IDI thread for all this?

 

[Linda7NJ]

No I am not.. It is the same thing.. I am pretty sure people reading it can get the meaning of the sentence.

If you would like others to take your opinions seriously you should at the very least understand the terminology and attempt to understand the science.
Especially since others have attempted to educate you on that very word you continue to misuse. Instead of integrating that new knowledge, you prefer to cling to your mistake and keep repeating it. You bolster my point that you have no idea what you're talking about and have the inability to take in new information.

 

[Linda7NJ]

There only has to be one match to the murderer.

You state it puts someone else there. By your logic it would put 6 people there.

 

[Chelly]

Isn't there an IDI thread for all this?

Yes, but the only poster that posts there is IDI, so there is no one to debate.
I do miss the days of sleuthing, logic and reason.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

So funny, No one thinks the fibers are secondary transfer, No one thinks things that lead to the R's in there scenario is secondary transfer..
But this must be???

IT is being used to solve cases, until we know who this DNA belongs to, It is every indication that someone was there that was an unknown intruder.

So true. :floorlaugh:

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Yes, but the only poster that posts there is IDI, so there is no one to debate.
I do miss the days of sleuthing, logic and reason.

Pretty sure I am not the only one who thinks it was someone else. It is sad but I think a lot of people are afraid to post and say what they think. If you believe there was someone else there you are treated badly here.

It is not easy to stand up and say what you believe when you then become a target.

What would be nice if everyone was treated well no matter what their opinion on the case.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

You state it puts someone else there. By your logic it would put 6 people there.

Step by step.. It does not mean that 6 people were there although that is technically possible. What it means is that only one of them have to be a match to find the killer. Just because there are 6 sources of course does not mean that they all HAVE To be murderers but it does mean that ONE could be.. Especially the one who has a source that is mixed with JBR blood.

Sounds pretty simple to me.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Pretty sure I am not the only one who thinks it was someone else. It is sad but I think a lot of people are afraid to post and say what they think. If you believe there was someone else there you are treated badly here.

It is not easy to stand up and say what you believe when you then become a target.

What would be nice if everyone was treated well no matter what their opinion on the case.

I couldn't agree more. Yesterday I merely asked for a link that TOS says should have been in the post to begin with and I'm jumped on by multiple people to just Google it myself. It gets worse if anyone posts against the majority viewpoint. I don't blame any IDI's for sitting on the sideline on this forum.

 

[FrayedKnot]

Step by step.. It does not mean that 6 people were there although that is technically possible. What it means is that only one of them have to be a match to find the killer. Just because there are 6 sources of course does not mean that they all HAVE To be murderers but it does mean that ONE could be.. Especially the one who has a source that is mixed with JBR blood.

Sounds pretty simple to me.

Or that none of the sources were the killer..........

Your speculation is not fact.

 

[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!

BBM

:floorlaugh: