NE: Forgotten DNA Evidence Clears Key Figures

[Britt]

...why,knowing it was male dna did they swab only arianna in 1999?

If they did, doesn't that make you question the claim of "male DNA"?

 

[Ivy]

sissi, do you think the "mother's intuition" theory is applicable when the mother herself is under the umbrella of suspicion?

Would you please post a source for the information you posted about arianna? It doesn't ring a bell. Thanks.

 

[sissi]

http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1999/20crams.html

 

[Ivy]

Thanks, sissi. According to the article, Hunter ordered the sample taken. It seems clear to me that Hunter was just making sure all the i's were dotted and t's crossed when presenting evidence to the grand jury.

 

[sissi]

Thanks, sissi. According to the article, Hunter ordered the sample taken. It seems clear to me that Hunter was just making sure all the i's were dotted and t's crossed when presenting evidence to the grand jury.

You may very well be right!
What has concerned me all along is the possibility that the underwear was being returned,perhaps with other clothing and shoes that were borrowed on the 23rd.
If this is a possibility,it would answer questions concerning the odd size and the possible laundering,perhaps even explain the dna. However,it would implicate a Pugh as taking off Jonbenet's size 6 and replacing it with what he was returning,the size 12's.
JMO IMO

 

[Maxi]

I thought they had taken lots of dna, including samples of a number of females. Is that wrong?

 

[Toth]

Attorney Wood charged that police ignored the DNA sample - which does not match any Ramsey family member - for nearly four years because they were convinced the Ramseys killed their daughter.

The earlier testing had excluded the Ramseys too, police ignored that as well.

 

[Toth]

Apparently, the panties WERE new, just pulled out of a package found in JBR's room

This 'prior human handling' seems a strange things to suggest. The dna from the panties and the dna from under the fingernail are from the same source: the attacker; not some Asian factory worker theorized to have sneezed.

 

[Ivy]

Toth, please post a valid source stating that the panties DNA and the fingernail DNA came from the same person.

 

[Shylock]

The dna from the panties and the dna from under the fingernail are from the same source: the attacker.

Oh really? Geee, all that DNA, from all those different places, and yet none of it able to yield a complete DNA profile. Kinda sounds like you got some bad information to me, Toth.

 

[Shylock]

The earlier testing had excluded the Ramseys too, police ignored that as well.

No the police did not ignore that, Toth. Maybe you should read Thomas to find out a few FACTS in this case. The EXPERTS from CellMark told the BPD that the DNA from the panties excluded the Ramseys ONLY if it was from a SINGLE SOURCE. If it wasn't, and they couldn't be sure either way, NOBODY was excluded.

"Nobody" Toth, means "Ramseys included"...get it now?

 

[sissi]

No the police did not ignore that, Toth. Maybe you should read Thomas to find out a few FACTS in this case. The EXPERTS from CellMark told the BPD that the DNA from the panties excluded the Ramseys ONLY if it was from a SINGLE SOURCE. If it wasn't, and they couldn't be sure either way, NOBODY was excluded.

"Nobody" Toth, means "Ramseys included"...get it now?

Fact??Thomas??
It was in PMPT,I believe ,where Schiller stated the dna excluded the Ramseys,however if it was from two sources it could not exclude Barnhill. He was the only one tested, at that time ,mentioned in the book that could not be excluded. Perhaps Schiller should have been called on this statement years ago,to explain to us who HIS source was.
IMO

 

[Cherokee]

This 'prior human handling' seems a strange things to suggest. The dna from the panties and the dna from under the fingernail are from the same source: the attacker; not some Asian factory worker theorized to have sneezed.

Come on, Toth, I've asked you on TWO different threads to provide documented evidence that the DNA from JBR's panties and from JBR's fingernails was the SAME, as in FROM THE SAME SOURCE.

Let's hear it. Where's the evidence? Barbara even asked for it on her original post starting the DNA thread, and you didn't provide one there either.

I'm tired of this RST game.

Give me definite proof that the partial DNA from JBR's size 12, brand new, never washed, right out of the package panties is from the EXACT SAME SOURCE as the partial, contaminated DNA (because separate, sterilized clippers were not used) from under her fingernails.

The rumor that they are the same has circulated on the Internet by the RST for years, but NO ONE can ever provide a documented (or even undocumented) source.

Come on, Toth. I double dog dare you ... post a source for your unsubstantiated claim, or quit posting it as fact ... and especially quit posting it as a fact to me ... because I know better.




IMO

 

[sissi]

I read it,as well,and believe it was in a statement of some kind from Shapiro,as something Alex Hunter shared with him? Sounds right to me,but not completely certain.
JMO IMO
It was around the time that Lee and Sheck were involved,and were ,at that time,considered the unbiased voices of reason that influenced the call for no indictment. But the "public" chose to blame Hunter for that call.
IMO JMO

 

[sissi]

Here is an interesting exchage on Geraldo

Barry Sheck was asked to address a dna issue,he was uncomfortable because of grand jury secrecy issues,so he threw the "ball" to Shiller who could turn it into a hypothetical scenario.Certainly this indicates there was knowledge of this matching dna early on.

Barry, what do you know about the DNA evidence to the extent that you feel comfortable talking
about it at all?

Mr. SCHECK: Well, I don't feel too comfortable, I have to tell you.

RIVERA: Well, y--well, let's--say what you can, and then we'll let Larry fill in--talk.

Mr. SCHECK: Well, you know what? Maybe we should let Larry talk, because--look, I'll...

Mr. SCHILLER: Barry--Barry--no, I have...

Mr. SCHECK: I think I'm covered by grand jury secrecy on this.

Mr. SCHILLER: Yeah. Right. No, I--I know Barry is in a very difficult situation, because even when
the police made the presentation to the district attorney's office, and Mr. Scheck was there, you
know, he raised some very issue--very interesting issues with the police officers, which I won't go
into.

But what is interesting is if there is DNA under the fingernails, and if there is foreign DNA in a mixed
stain in the pants, then do those two DNAs match, and are they able to match it? You know, is one
DNA like under the fingernail possibly contaminated and, therefore, a match to the pants is not
possible? These are very crucial questions because if there is a match between the fingernails and
the pants, and it's not the parents, then you have to look very serious that there may have been
another person that this child touched prior to the washing of those pants, when they were
previously cleaned or wh--when the child took a bath or when she was cleaned.

As with all available information,I choose to believe my interpretation ,it is not "spin" it is IMO a very valid interpretation.
IMO JMO

 

[sissi]

There "ain't no superman",so let's believe that "truth,justice and the American way" is settled in the courts. Let's stop choosing our sources,and leave it up to the judicial system,where lines such as this one originated......
DNA evidence
was further consistent with the possibility of an intruder, as JonBenet had the DNA of an
unknown male under some of her fingernails and on her underpants.
Wolf vs Ramsey

 

[Cherokee]

Come on, Toth, I've asked you on TWO different threads to provide documented evidence that the DNA from JBR's panties and from JBR's fingernails was the SAME, as in FROM THE SAME SOURCE.

Let's hear it. Where's the evidence? Barbara even asked for it on her original post starting the DNA thread, and you didn't provide one there either.

I'm tired of this RST game.

Give me definite proof that the partial DNA from JBR's size 12, brand new, never washed, right out of the package panties is from the EXACT SAME SOURCE as the partial, contaminated DNA (because separate, sterilized clippers were not used) from under her fingernails.

The rumor that they are the same has circulated on the Internet by the RST for years, but NO ONE can ever provide a documented (or even undocumented) source.

Come on, Toth. I double dog dare you ... post a source for your unsubstantiated claim, or quit posting it as fact ... and especially quit posting it as a fact to me ... because I know better.

IMO

Bumping up for Toth because I see he's been posting here since I requested documented evidence to back up his ceaseless statements that the panty DNA was the exact same as the fingernail DNA.

Still waiting ....

Enquiring minds want to know.




IMO

 

[Shylock]

Let's stop choosing our sources,and leave it up to the judicial system,

If you want to leave it up to the judicial system, then you have to get someone COMPETENT to present the other side. Judge Carnes ruled correctly, based on the evidence presented her by an incompetent fool representing the non-intruder side.

Carnes ruling is totally meaningless to this case.

IMO

 

[Maxi]

Barry Scheck said in another interview that it was possible the foreign DNA was just "noise".

 

[sissi]

Barry Scheck said in another interview that it was possible the foreign DNA was just "noise".

This is interesting Maxi,I wonder if we could find out the dates of his comments? Did he think it could be noise and changed his mind,or could he have considered it viable and later thought it "noise"?
JMO