Question

[WolfmarsGirl]

...Toth, lets pretend a little girl is running home from a birthday party and gets hit and killed by a car...

Oh! Shylock, that is a terrible thing to pretend.

...The coroner finds chocolate under her fingernails and a trace of chocolate in her panties. Are you going to contrive some big sexual crime story about it or just explain it as simple secondary transfer from a bathroom break after eating birthday cake?

Even though I agree with you .

 

[BlueCrab]

With a good, clean, strong DNA sample, perhaps. Have you looked at the site for DNAPrint? They require two thousand markers in a sample to conduct what they call pan-genome coverage. The Chase case is not known to have had problems with degraded samples, just with no matches to be found in the information they had. But if the Ramsey case can barely eke out 10 markers, well, you can see why the Ramsey case may not benefit from this particular magic bullet.

As information only (to clarify the 2,000 marker comment):

The new "DNA Witness" technology is not hampered by requiring a crime scene sample as few as 2,000 markers. A drop of blood so small you could barely see it with the naked eye would contain more than 2,000 markers.

The human body contains about 10 trillion cells, each of them identical to the other. There are 46 chromosomes in each of those cells, and each of those chromosomes contain one very long coiled strand of DNA.

Your little finger alone contains about 5 billion identical cells, each cell packed with 46 chromosomes containing identical strands of DNA.

IOW, 2,000 markers would be an extremely tiny DNA sample from a crime scene. Quantity is not usually the problem with crime scene DNA samples -- and as you correctly state about the JonBenet case -- condition of the samples are usually the problem.

Just my opinion

BlueCrab

 

[sissi]

Have they identified the "source" of the dna in terms of fluid/skin/hair?
Could it be the dna under her nails was from skin scrapings,and the dna taken from her underwear was either from blood,sweat..saliva?
The ability to match 6 markers if from two different mediums would be huge. IMO

 

[LovelyPigeon]

Steve Thomas in his hardback edition p268 identifies the DNA as male.

BPD chief Beckner has said that the DNA from the Ramsey case was compared to Michael Helgoth and Gary Oliva. Both of those men are male.

Lou Smit has said publically that the foreign DNA found on JonBenét was from a male, and that it was not from John, Patsy, or Burke.

I don't think there is now or ever has been any forensic question that the DNA in question is male, and that it does not match any Ramsey.

 

[Imon128]

It might be a tad misleading to say it doesn't belong to a Ramsey. The key indicatior is that it can't be identified, period. Right?

 

[LovelyPigeon]

Imon, there are at least 10 markers. The Ramseys and their extended family were swabbed for DNA samples.

The DNA has been submitted to CODIS.

If the DNA matched any Ramsey, it would not now be submitted to CODIS, looking for a *match* to DNA now, or to be submitted or included at some date, inside that databank.

 

[Imon128]

In that case, it would then eliminate McSanta, Fleet White, Barnhill's boarder, Pugh, and all other males that get thrown in mistakenly, methinks.

If it were a Ramsey, simply submitting to CODIS wouldn't eliminate that person as it would take a previous reason to have it in CODIS to begin with. If this was an accident/first time death, there wouldn't be anything in CODIS to compare to, right? That would eliminate 'eliminating' by CODIS, IMO.

 

[LovelyPigeon]

Imon, do you believe that the Ramseys' DNA samples were not compared to the male DNA found under the nails and in the underwear? Perhaps you have forgotten that there has been shown on CBS a copy of one document that showed such a comparison.

The Ramseys do not match the foreign DNA on JonBenét, nor the DNA-X, wherever it may have been found.

 

[sissi]

LP,I agree,there has never been a question concerning "that" dna,however,I do wonder if there is another ,the dna-x,x perhaps indicating female,that needed to be sourced before moving forward with "it"as an issue. This is the only reason I can place on the late testing of Arianna.
Remember the "housemaid/nursing shoe prints",Sas I believe,that were brought up around the same time as the Hi-tecs? In the early days,it was said there were many prints, now we are down to ONE? There is some evidence being held from the public,very little, given the leaks,and since Thomas seemed in his depo to be so uninformed,so removed from the area of evidence,we can "assume", as he did throughout his questioning,some things ourselves,I am assuming there was more than one hitec print,and that it was found in the bedroom,I am assuming,as well,that along side of one of these prints was a "sas" one. I don't know what this means as far as suspects,but I think it has presented a bit of a dilemma , meaning there could have been a woman involved ,
as well. JMO

 

[Imon128]

From what I've read in Steve's book, the Ramseys can't be nailed nor exculpated by the DNA.

Also, some DNA will never be attributed to JB's killer. It's just stutter. Also, I have no faith in Smit's blather.

 

[Britt]

The Ramseys do not match the foreign DNA on JonBenét, nor the DNA-X, wherever it may have been found.

:waitasec: How do you know the DNA-X doesn't match a Ramsey?

 

[LovelyPigeon]

Britt, you could read up the thread for some other posts, but the bottom line is that no one in law enforcement claims the Ramseys match any DNA found on JonBenét.

Former DA Hunter, former policeman Steve Thomas, former detective Lou Smit, Judge Carnes, the present DA, Lin Wood, etc etc have all conceded that there is foreign male DNA that was found on JonBenét and that it does not match a Ramsey.

If it did match a Ramsey, there would have been no need to compare that DNA to the extended family of the Ramseys, to playmates, to other case characters, to Oliva, to Helgoth, or now, to the entire dna database of the FBI.

Yes, it's obvious that CODIS has not yet yielded a "hit" on the male DNA sample submitted from the Ramsey case, but that certainly does not mean that it can't or won't any day now or sometime in the future.

Not only is there a backlog of entering and comparing samples, but there are new samples lining up to be added every day. There are reports of old--some MUCH older than 1996--being solved with DNA. Some of those didn't "hit" on a match in a databank previously and have just now been able to match because of a new entry. Some are based on better technology, or the discovery of DNA on old evidence items.

Others, like this case, finally found a "hit" on a man who had no previous DNA sample in any database. A lab tech in Oregon compared 500 samples over 2 years before the hit was made--and that was on someone who knew the victim but had never been considered a suspect previously!

Police say DNA link cracked UP case
Two years after the May 2001 killing, police had no leads, but a DNA match starts "the real work" of building a case
01/18/04
TOM QUINN and PETER FARRELL Deniz Aydiner was not a suspect in the 2001 killing of Kate Johnson in a University of Portland dormitory until after police collected a DNA sample from him last year, and people who knew them both say they never thought he would be accused of harming her. --->>
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1074430620212660.xml

 

[Imon128]

Even if DNA matched a Ramsey, they could try dismiss it as normal, since the household was shared by victim and the other household members. It needs to be tied to the crime.

 

[Toth]

My understanding of CODIS is a bit lacking.
does it contain dna profiles from arrestees, or persons who are convicted or does it also contain profiles from suspects other than those arrested or convicted?

In other words: We know that Gary Oliva was convicted of a sex offense in Oregon. On the assumption that Oregon law provides he would be sampled and that sample placed in CODIS, the fact that the 'Rogue DNA' from the JBR corpse did not get a 'hit' in the CODIS databse would therefore mean that Gary Oliva and all others already in the database were not the individuals who contributed to the dna found on JBR.

However, people who have not been arrested or convicted, but merely voluntarily provided dna samples such as Patsy Ramsey, John Ramsey, Fleet White(?), McSanta, etc: these people would not be "in the CODIS database" at all. So "no hits" does not necessarily exclude McSanta or Fleet White.

 

[Imon128]

Nor would it exclude a Ramsey.

 

[LovelyPigeon]

True, if the male DNA had matched to John or Burke, it would have been attempted by a defense at trial to dismiss it as some normal, innocent transference. But DNA in her panties mixed with her blood would certainly have been just cause to charge JR with her death--and no doubt would have resulted in just that action.

The panties were brand new out of the package, and not washed previous to JonBenét's wearing. Since JR had no claim of dressing JBR previous to her murder, and would have had no explanation for transfer of his DNA into her panties, a jury would have IMO convicted him.

I believe a jury will convict whoever that DNA belongs to for JBR's murder.

 

[Imon128]

It's been a big assumption that the panties came out of a package, but we haven't known that to be a fact, have we?

 

[Britt]

If it did match a Ramsey, there would have been no need to compare that DNA to the extended family of the Ramseys, to playmates, to other case characters, to Oliva, to Helgoth, or now, to the entire dna database of the FBI.

And how do we know which of the non-Ramseys, if any, the DNA-X was compared to, or if the DNA-X was submitted to the FBI database?

 

[Toth]

The Oregon case appears to involve a Turkish man married to an American, but who had no job and seemed to be more 'hanging around' the University and the dormitory than enrolled there.
Often there are such 'hangers on' around college campuses. They work at menial jobs and take classes but may lack skills to obtain girl friends of their own age.
I'm not certain if such a hanger on might have been involved in the JBR case, but absent any later arrest/conviction his dna is not likely to be tested.

 

[LovelyPigeon]

Imon, the package of panties was recovered by Ramsey investigators after the house was turned back over by BPD to the family.

Lin Wood obtained the package and turned it over to the DA (I think it was 2003, but I might be off a year). There was at least one article, with quotes from Wood, about the package of panties.