Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 25 to 36 of 111
  1. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    Mary Lacy HIRED Kolar to do the job that he carried out, and when she didn't like his conclusions, summarily fired him. "Wrong result, James! You didn't find the foreign faction, so you're fired!"

    Last edited by Cherokee; August 1, 2012, 6:54 pm at Wed Aug 1 18:54:22 UTC 2012.
    "We're not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be." - C.S. Lewis

    MY OPINIONS - DO NOT COPY THEM ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET!

  2. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BobC View Post
    I'm with you Heymom. I am really scared that our criminal justice system will grind to a halt if trace DNA, half a nanogram, can exonerate people who have a dead child in a locked home/staged crime scene. The implications are mind-boggling.
    Bob....

    What criminal justice system? We can see that there will be no justice for JonBenet, she will forever remain a victim, killed by one in her own family, or perhaps one with the help of another.

    I don't know exactly why or how the Ramseys got away with this, but they did, and many of us are incredulous and horrified that our supposedly "blind justice" can actually be bought and paid for, if you have enough money and the right connections.
    "We're not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be." - C.S. Lewis

    MY OPINIONS - DO NOT COPY THEM ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET!

  3. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    1,311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cynic View Post
    THE DNA PROFILES DEVELOPED FROM EXHIBITS #5A, 5B, AND 17C MATCHED THE PROFILE FROM JONBENET RAMSEY.

    FED FROM EXHIBITS #7, 14L AND 14M REVEALED A MIX- COMPONENT MATCHED JONBENET RAMSEY. IF THE MINOR
    5 #7, 14L AND 14M WERE CONTRIBUTED BY A SINGLE
    JOHN ANDREW RAMSEY, MELINDA RAMSEY, JOHN B. RAMSEY, JEFF
    RAMSEY
    EXCLUDED AS A SOURCE OF THE DNA ANALYZED.
    I notice that BR is not listed as among those excluded. Is it because he was never tested? Because he is not ALLOWED to be named? Or is he in the "netherworld" of the blacked out parts.
    This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  4. #28

    Default

    According to the Ramsey DNA Lab Report we have, Burke Ramsey was tested against the partial, degraded, minor component DNA mixed with JonBenet's DNA.

    This lab report is limited in that it does not detail all the DNA findings in the Ramsey case. However, it does give us a window on understanding the partial DNA and "touch DNA" found in this case.

    "IFTHE MINOR COMPONENTS FROM EXHIBITS #7, 14L AND 14M WERE CONTRIBUTED BY A SINGLE INDIVIDUAL, JOHN ANDREW RAMSEY, MELINDA RAMSEY, JOHN B. RAMSEY, PATRICIA RAMSEY, BURKE RAMSEY, JEFF RAMSEY, FLEET WHITE, PRISCILLA WHITE, AND MARVIN PUGH WOULD BE EXCLUDED AS A SOURCE OF THE DNA ANALYZED."

    What IDIs, Ramsey apologists and the RST don't ever want anyone to notice is the very big IF in this DNA lab report.

    IF the three DNA components mentioned were contributed by a single individual, then the following people are excluded ...

    That shows the contaminate possibly present in the DNA samples. Even the official lab report cannot say with certainty the DNA mixtures are from a single individual. This DNA was a minor component mixed with JonBenet's DNA as the major component.

    The above individuals were tested against this partial, degraded DNA, but since there were not enough DNA markers (12-13) to determine if it was one individual or a composite of several, the test results were stated with the very important qualifier IF.

    Now we find out Lacy's "touch DNA" results included SIX different individuals, not one. More DNA contaminate. We are surrounded by it. Everyone has partial DNA contaminate on their skin and clothing. It's only when a fresh, undegraded and full complement of 12-13 markers is present can DNA labs determine a separate individual was present.


    This lab report is found in the FFJ Ramsey Case Library:

    http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...ead.php?t=9867
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  5. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cherokee View Post
    According to the Ramsey DNA Lab Report we have, Burke Ramsey was tested against the partial, degraded, minor component DNA mixed with JonBenet's DNA.

    This lab report is limited in that it does not detail all the DNA findings in the Ramsey case. However, it does give us a window on understanding the partial DNA and "touch DNA" found in this case.

    "IFTHE MINOR COMPONENTS FROM EXHIBITS #7, 14L AND 14M WERE CONTRIBUTED BY A SINGLE INDIVIDUAL, JOHN ANDREW RAMSEY, MELINDA RAMSEY, JOHN B. RAMSEY, PATRICIA RAMSEY, BURKE RAMSEY, JEFF RAMSEY, FLEET WHITE, PRISCILLA WHITE, AND MARVIN PUGH WOULD BE EXCLUDED AS A SOURCE OF THE DNA ANALYZED."

    What IDIs, Ramsey apologists and the RST don't ever want anyone to notice is the very big IF in this DNA lab report.

    IF the three DNA components mentioned were contributed by a single individual, then the following people are excluded ...

    That shows the contaminate possibly present in the DNA samples. Even the official lab report cannot say with certainty the DNA mixtures are from a single individual. This DNA was a minor component mixed with JonBenet's DNA as the major component.

    The above individuals were tested against this partial, degraded DNA, but since there were not enough DNA markers (12-13) to determine if it was one individual or a composite of several, the test results were stated with the very important qualifier IF.

    Now we find out Lacy's "touch DNA" results included SIX different individuals, not one. More DNA contaminate. We are surrounded by it. Everyone has partial DNA contaminate on their skin and clothing. It's only when a fresh, undegraded and full complement of 12-13 markers is present can DNA labs determine a separate individual was present.


    This lab report is found in the FFJ Ramsey Case Library:

    http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...ead.php?t=9867
    Second paragraph, DNA from sperm fractions? What sperm fractions? If it's from the blanket in the suitcase they knew that was from JAR. This DNA could not be analyzed?

    There was a lot more blood than we thought. Did all of that come from JB's hymen? On the barbie nightgown and white blanket??

  6. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koldkase View Post

    Plus there's that bugaboo, the pineapple in the intestinal tract. Kolar mentions early in the book the medical experts gave the timeline of that pineapple being digested and moving through to her intestine as approx. 2 hours. The head blow injuries were given 90 minutes from the blow to the strangulation, according to Kolar, so that timeline works like this: JonBenet ate the pineapple; half an hour later she was bludgeoned; 90 minutes later she was asphyxiated with the ligature.
    Would the head blow have slowed her digestion processes?
    "We're not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be." - C.S. Lewis

    MY OPINIONS - DO NOT COPY THEM ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET!

  7. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    1,311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by heymom View Post
    Would the head blow have slowed her digestion processes?
    A coma might, but it wouldn't have made much difference to the case or timeline, really. She ate the pineapple about 2 hrs before death, most likely shortly after arriving home, and the head bash and strangulation came relatively close together. Rigor mortis tells us she had been dead around 12 hours when she was found. So the timeline of death between 11 pm and 1 am is about right anyway.
    While the head bash alone might have taken up to an hour to kill her WITHOUT the strangulation, she may have become comatose right after it. Certainly, she was rendered unconscious, which is why the strangulation showed no evidence of struggle. The ligature furrows were circumferential, little sign of movement. The tape on her mouth showed no evidence of struggle against it. Her lip prints were perfect.
    The rate of digestion varies from person to person according to individual metabolism and according to what was eaten, to be sure, but not so much that it isn't subject to some sort of standard. Two FACTS to remember. Foods do not "leap frog" over each other in the digestive tract. Last eaten = last digested. And digestion stops at death. Like all metabolic processes.
    This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  8. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karen View Post
    Second paragraph, DNA from sperm fractions? What sperm fractions? If it's from the blanket in the suitcase they knew that was from JAR. This DNA could not be analyzed?

    There was a lot more blood than we thought. Did all of that come from JB's hymen? On the barbie nightgown and white blanket??
    The sperm fractions were from the black blanket in the suitcase. At the point in time this report was made, they didn't already KNOW the sperm fractions were from JAR. This report was from early in the case, so I would assume it is actually where it was revealed that JAR was the donor of the sperm fractions. The sperm fractions were compared to DNA in a blood sample drawn from JAR and found to be a match.

    To answer your question about the blood ... no, it did not come from JonBenet's hymen.

    From the lab report:

    BLOODSTAINS FROM SHIRT
    BLOODSTAINS FROM PANTIES
    BLOODSTAIN STANDARD FROM JONBENET RAMSEY
    SWAB WITH SALIVA
    RIGHT AND LEFT HAND FINGERNAILS FROM JONBENET RAMSEY
    SAMPLES FROM TAPE
    BLOODSTAIN FROM WHITE BLANKET
    BLOODSTAINS FROM NIGHTGOWN
    SEMEN STAINS FROM BLACK BLANKET
    BLOODSTAIN STANDARD FROM JOHN ANDREW RAMSEY

    A "bloodstain standard" is a blood sample drawn from a person to compare with the other items collected as evidence.

    So we have:

    Bloodstains from shirt
    Bloodstains from panties


    Bloodstain STANDARD from JonBenet Ramsey

    Swab with saliva (JonBenet)
    Right & left hand fingernails (scraping) (JonBenet)
    Samples (DNA) from tape (JonBenet)

    Bloodstain from white blanket
    Bloodstains from nightgown


    Semen stains from black blanket
    Bloodstain standard from John Andrew Ramsey

    (There are more entries below this on the report, but that is all that is able to be seen on the screen capture.)

    According to this lab report, there were four different areas where samples of blood were found and analyzed:

    shirt
    panties
    white blanket
    nightgown



    These samples could have been as tiny as a miniscule drop or larger. "Bloodstain" does not literally mean a huge bloodstain but is lab lingo for the sample prepared for analysis.

  9. #33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cherokee View Post
    The sperm fractions were from the black blanket in the suitcase. At the point in time this report was made, they didn't already KNOW the sperm fractions were from JAR. This report was from early in the case, so I would assume it is actually where it was revealed that JAR was the donor of the sperm fractions. The sperm fractions were compared to DNA in a blood sample drawn from JAR and found to be a match.

    To answer your question about the blood ... no, it did not come from JonBenet's hymen.

    From the lab report:

    BLOODSTAINS FROM SHIRT
    BLOODSTAINS FROM PANTIES
    BLOODSTAIN STANDARD FROM JONBENET RAMSEY
    SWAB WITH SALIVA
    RIGHT AND LEFT HAND FINGERNAILS FROM JONBENET RAMSEY
    SAMPLES FROM TAPE
    BLOODSTAIN FROM WHITE BLANKET
    BLOODSTAINS FROM NIGHTGOWN
    SEMEN STAINS FROM BLACK BLANKET
    BLOODSTAIN STANDARD FROM JOHN ANDREW RAMSEY

    A "bloodstain standard" is a blood sample drawn from a person to compare with the other items collected as evidence.

    So we have:

    Bloodstains from shirt
    Bloodstains from panties


    Bloodstain STANDARD from JonBenet Ramsey

    Swab with saliva (JonBenet)
    Right & left hand fingernails (scraping) (JonBenet)
    Samples (DNA) from tape (JonBenet)

    Bloodstain from white blanket
    Bloodstains from nightgown


    Semen stains from black blanket
    Bloodstain standard from John Andrew Ramsey

    (There are more entries below this on the report, but that is all that is able to be seen on the screen capture.)

    According to this lab report, there were four different areas where samples of blood were found and analyzed:

    shirt
    panties
    white blanket
    nightgown



    These samples could have been as tiny as a miniscule drop or larger. "Bloodstain" does not literally mean a huge bloodstain but is lab lingo for the sample prepared for analysis.
    Ahhhh, thank you Cherokee. I'm still curious where the blood on the nightgown and blanket came from though. Even if just a speck.

  10. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karen View Post
    Ahhhh, thank you Cherokee. I'm still curious where the blood on the nightgown and blanket came from though. Even if just a speck.
    You're welcome.

    I suppose it's possible the small amount of blood in JonBenet's panties also leaked through to the blanket and nightgown since the blanket was wrapped around the lower half of her body, and the nightgown was inside the blanket, but obviously, that's only conjecture.

    I also wonder about the blood found on JonBenet's shirt. Was it a trace drop from when she was cleaned up? Were the blood samples on the blanket and nightgown from the paintbrush that was used in an effort to disguise previous sexual abuse and not caught in the clean up effort that followed?

    There is still much we don't know.

  11. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cherokee View Post
    You're welcome.

    I suppose it's possible the small amount of blood in JonBenet's panties also leaked through to the blanket and nightgown since the blanket was wrapped around the lower half of her body, and the nightgown was inside the blanket, but obviously, that's only conjecture.

    I also wonder about the blood found on JonBenet's shirt. Was it a trace drop from when she was cleaned up? Were the blood samples on the blanket and nightgown from the paintbrush that was used in an effort to disguise previous sexual abuse and not caught in the clean up effort that followed?

    There is still much we don't know.
    I thought about that too but there was no blood on the longjohns as far as we know and in order for it to get to the blanket it would have had to go through the panties and longjohns both. I'm very curous about this extra blood, not from the hymen. How much and from where? I suppose we'll never know now.

  12. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karen View Post
    I thought about that too but there was no blood on the longjohns as far as we know and in order for it to get to the blanket it would have had to go through the panties and longjohns both. I'm very curous about this extra blood, not from the hymen. How much and from where? I suppose we'll never know now.
    That's true about the longjohns, but maybe a tiny amount of blood seeped through to the blanket/nightgown AFTER the over-sized panties were put on JonBenet but BEFORE the longjohns were once again put on her feet and pulled up over legs.

    It would have taken some time and effort to undress and redress a recently deceased JonBenet because her muscles were completely relaxed in a condition known as "primary flaccidity" that occurs at the moment of death. It's where we get the phrase and meaning of "dead weight."

    http://www.deathreference.com/Py-Se/...m-Changes.html

    Later, rigor mortis begins within two to six hours of death, starting with the eyelids, neck, and jaw. Interestingly, that's why people through the ages made sure to close the eyelids of the deceased and keep them closed with coins, because the eyelids were the first part of the body to stiffen into rigor mortis.



Similar Threads

  1. CNN Interviews James Kolar (Oct 26, 2013)
    By cynic in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: October 28, 2013, 3:56 pm, Mon Oct 28 15:56:28 UTC 2013
  2. Sexual Behavior Problems (SBP) - from James Kolar's book about Ramsey case
    By koldkase in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 159
    Last Post: December 24, 2012, 11:24 am, Mon Dec 24 11:24:14 UTC 2012
  3. Where to buy James Kolar's book: "Foreign Faction - Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet"
    By Cherokee in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: August 18, 2012, 12:35 pm, Sat Aug 18 12:35:36 UTC 2012
  4. James Kolar's new book! It's what we have been waiting for! Daily Beast article!
    By Moab in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 308
    Last Post: August 14, 2012, 10:11 pm, Tue Aug 14 22:11:18 UTC 2012
  5. Listen to James Kolar talk about new book on Tricia's show tonight! (July 18, 2012)
    By Cherokee in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: July 19, 2012, 8:43 pm, Thu Jul 19 20:43:59 UTC 2012

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •