A DNA expert will be available to answer your questions!

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by cynic, Feb 17, 2013.

  1. cynic

    cynic Member

    In the very near future, Tricia’s True Crime Radio will be featuring a DNA expert, (who has appeared in nearly a hundred trials as a Court recognized expert witness,) to answer some questions relating to the JonBenet case and discuss DNA issues in general.
    Please post your questions here.
    (There is no guarantee your question will be asked, but every effort will be made to be as accommodating as possible.)
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2013
  2. OpenMind4U

    OpenMind4U Member

    Specific to JBR case question:

    Does John Ramsey DNA has been found on/in JB's mouth area (CPR was performed or not? Eeny, meeny, miny, moe,: Catch a LIER by the toe:)

    General DNA questions:

    Based on CODIS standards for partial DNA:
    - is it legal to publicly exonerate anyone 'who partially didn't match'?
    - in which situations and by whom the partial DNA has been proclaimed as the MAJOR evidence of the crime versa 'non-essential artifacts' (with assumption that CODIS has the 'remarks' area)?
    - does partial DNA in CODIS has 'expiration/removal' date and if yes then under which criteria it performs??

    Thank you!
     
  3. zoomama

    zoomama Active Member

    DNA is now accepted in Jury trials everywhere. Has there been a court trial with TOUCH DNA used as evidence? And if so was it a murder trail?
     
  4. cynic

    cynic Member

    Dr. Dan Krane will be the guest on Tricia’s True Crime Radio this Sunday.
    His CV is 35 pages long
    http://www.bioforensics.com/CV/KraneCV01-12.pdf
    He has recently released the following very informative videos.
    (Additional supporting documents and other information can be found at:
    http://www.bioforensics.com/)

    DNA technology in court
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zp1ZfqeGPhU

    Generating forensic DNA profiles
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt3gRO8nfeY

    Artifacts and noise in DNA profiling
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5ErDtXV-NE

    Statistical weights of single source DNA profiles
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leRP3xhO_ZA

    Statistical weights of mixed DNA profiles
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVHo1Pjf210

    Implications of database searches for DNA profiling statistics
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtTIPFjlQeI

    Observer effects in DNA profiling
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyN27k7bLxg

    What can go wrong with DNA profiling?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJU7H7xnxKI
     
  5. Elle

    Elle Member

    Thank you cynic for this valuable information. I will work my way through them.
     
  6. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Yes, thanks cynic, for all you do in keeping us on our toes.

    Or just awake. :cheerful:

    Could such small amounts of unsourced DNA as was found on the clothing of JonBenet over a period of many years, starting in 1997, have come from one or more various medical and lab technicians handling the clothing, leaving contaminants from sources other than any of the known, tested subjects?
     
  7. cynic

    cynic Member

  8. cynic

    cynic Member

    One of the cases that was mentioned on the show involves a recent ebook which some of you might be interested in.
    It relates to an old (1961) controversial case from the UK which, regardless of how you may feel about the verdict, it seems that DNA should have been left out of the controversy given the problems that the author, Robert Harriman, outlines.
    Hanratty: The DNA Travesty
    http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00E9QPEES
     
  9. cynic

    cynic Member

    Two bombshells from the show
    The much vaunted DNA evidence that Mary Lacy, Lin Wood have shamelessly paraded around would NOT BE ADMISSIBLE in court because it is a mixed profile with dropout.
    “… there is no generally accepted means of attaching a reliable statistical weight to a mixed DNA profile where allelic drop out may have occurred."
    Listen at 54:38 – 58:25
    Continuing on with Mary Lacy, Dr Krane said that if she based the exoneration exclusively on the DNA evidence then that was WRONG – “THAT THAT CONVEYS A LACK OF UNDERSTANDING OF DNA.â€
    Listen at 58:42 – 61:00
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2013
  10. Learnin

    Learnin Member


    It makes me want to throw my socks up, it really does. She was bound and determined to get Johnny off the hook before she got out of office....scratching around on clothes and trying to come up with a match....
    And the media backing off because they bought it.
     
  11. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    :bowdown:Tricia and :bowdown:Cynic--

    YOU ROCKED IT OUT!!

    :bowdown:Dr. Krane--

    YOU ARE BRILLIANT!


    (And I seldom am impressed by that--ask anyone--but in your case, I WILL MAKE AN EXCEPTION!)​


    For all of you faithful case followers, YOU MUST LISTEN TO THE FIRST HOUR OF TRICIA'S BLOG RADIO SHOW! At long, LOOOOOOOONG last, we have the DNA issues explained in language that won't have you pulling your hair out or banging your head on a wall!

    All from an international DNA profile expert WHO ACTUALLY TESTIFIES ABOUT DNA IN TRIALS...Oh, it's like we're ALMOST THERE! With Tricia and Cynic laying out the questions we NEVER thought we'd hear answered!

    Even I understood it! :clap:

    And you will be FLABBERGASTED, once again, at how much of a PURE SCAM it was to run the partial DNA evidence up the media flagpole as an excuse to "exonerate" the suspects to whom the overwhelming body of evidence invariably leads in this case: the Ramseys.

    Of course, we smelled that skunk all along. But now we have an ACTUAL WORLD-CLASS FORENSIC DNA PROFILER explain it to us.

    As cynic said, THE MIXED BLOOD SAMPLES OF PANTY DNA WITHOUT A FULL PROFILE FOR THE UNKNOWN DONOR NEVER WOULD HAVE MADE IT INTO A TRIAL! Dr. Krane explains it in inarguable terms: it's not allowed "BY AN ABUNDANCE OF CASE LAW" in the U.S.

    Also, turns out that "touch" DNA testing? Same thing as regular or LCN DNA testing, depending on how much of a sample is found by the high-tec process of scraping clothing with a razor. Yeah, it's that simple. And nothing new when it was paraded around by Team Ramsey as more advanced DNA technology in 2008. It was the same testing they'd done in 2002: LCN. They just scraped around on the clothing trying to find more. Then acted like it meant "more proof" of an intruder. But Dr. Krane explained it this way: there is no way to know how it was deposited there or when or by whom. It could have been secondary or tertiary transfer or contamination.

    Oh, you just have to listen to the show. HAVE TO!

    :bowdown:Cynic and :bowdown:Tricia, you did a MAGICAL job asking THE PERFECT QUESTIONS!

    I am ecstatic! :jumpie:

    I'm in shock. HOW..WHO...Tricia, Cynic...YOU HAVE DONE WHAT NO ONE ELSE HAS IN THIS CASE: you EXPOSED the DNA red herring for what it is, once and for all.

    Well, I have to give Chief Kolar:bow: lots of credit. He set it all out in his book, but having an EXPERT actually tell us in his own words just SEALED THE DEAL!

    And Steve Thomas:bow:--goes without saying, right? He truly started the unraveling of the diabolical chicanery of Team Ramsey when he put his heart and soul on the line for a little girl he never met.

    There won't be a trial, we all know that by now. But dammit, YOU GUYS HAVE BLOWN AWAY TEAM RAMSEY'S SMOKESCREEN.

    There's nothing left to give one iota of cred to that old imaginary intruder--not even a fifth of a nanogram of DNA!

    Yeah, I was listening--and taking copious notes! Cynic, if you are going to do a transcript, you're probably faster without me. But if not or you need help, I do have some important quotes I'll be happy to type up. (Only took me 3 hours to write them down by hand--see what I mean?) Just let me know.

    Again, I cannot thank all of you enough...oh, and Levi had some good "I'm lost in DNA science" questions, as well, which is exactly how I felt, so bravo to him, too! :clap:
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2013
  12. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    This is a time for celebration, Learnin. Keep your socks, because now we know the truth.

    And while it's not a trial, after all the years of lies and Ramsey BS, it's still dang good.

    We have an experienced forensic professional expert with an actual Ph.D, a professor, a man who could testify in court--and has scores of times--to everything he said, on the record: the DNA in this case is evidence of...nothing.

    It's a done deal.

    I won't listen to one more word of the propaganda spin of Team Ramsey from anyone: TALK TO THE HAND!
     

    Attached Files:

  13. Elle

    Elle Member

    KK,
    I have family coming and I don't know when I can listen to it, but I thank you for your wonderful enthusiastic post KK. It is so good to see the old familiar names back here again. All of you have to be commended
    for the amount of time taken to arrive at this stage.

    I have always wondered if Mary Lacy had a crush on John Ramsey and fell in love with him(?).
     
  14. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    I think Lacy had a crush on Ramsey's money and connections.

    It's always good to see you, Elle.

    So much time has passed since we all started this Internet journey following this case, life has dictated new horizons for us.

    But when people like Kolar, Tricia, and Cynic do so much to continue in the fight for the truth and justice for a murdered child who deserves it as much as any murder victim, even after 17 years, I'm going to show up if I possibly can.

    As will you. :grouphug:

    (Hope you enjoy your company.)
     
  15. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Something I also want to mention, as it may not be obvious from Dr. Krane's generous interview: it would cost an arm and a leg to have him give just this kind of testimony--in a trial.

    SCORE!! :scale:
     
  16. Cherokee

    Cherokee FFJ Senior Member

    I wish I could tie Mary Lacy to a chair, put earbuds in under those hair curtains and MAKE her listen to Dr. Krane's excellent DNA interview! I want her to hear a REAL expert and writhe under the weight of her idiocy.

    Ha ha, I must be delusional to think it would change Lacy's mind about the worthlessness of her "touch DNA" exoneration (it's difficult for her to do anything with only three working brain cells), but it would darn sure make ME feel better! :D

    Why doesn't the mainstream media interview Dr. Krane? Why don't they promote the real experts instead of parroting Mary Lacy and doing a cut and paste of what Bode Labs says in their commercials? Why are we the only ones who continue to try to expose the web of Ramsey lies?

    A pox on Mary Lacy and her bogus DNA exoneration! It has become the default quote on every story the mainstream media runs about the Ramsey case. As far as they are concerned the case closed, nothing else matters ... not even the fact that JOHN AND PATSY RAMSEY WERE INDICTED BY THE BOULDER GRAND JURY!!! That story only kept the attention span of the media for a couple of days.

    There is no intruder, there is no intruder DNA, there is nothing but the Ramseys protecting their own and living a lie that has been assisted by the stupid and the corrupt.

    :banghead:
     
  17. Elle

    Elle Member

    So good to see you back again, KK! A retired husband does change one's life, but one adapts and things all fall into place. Yes I keep coming back like a song! I missed you!

    This latest news on the DNA is way over my head. It was nice to hear cynic 's voice again. Good that Tricia can jump in and ask important questions. Just wish I understood it all better. Will listen to the rest of it when I can. Dr. Krane seems a very nice man.
     
  18. cynic

    cynic Member

    Thank you for the understated endorsement of the show. :D
     
  19. cynic

    cynic Member

    BBM
    Many here and elsewhere have logged far more hours on this case than I have and with very few moments of satisfaction. Hearing Dr. Krane say, in essence, that Lacy's exoneration CONVEYS A LACK OF UNDERSTANDING OF DNA, that, for me at least, was one of those moments of satisfaction.
     
  20. cynic

    cynic Member

    Thanks Elle, and I can definitely confirm that Dr. Krane is an incredibly nice guy, very giving of his time, and remarkably humble.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice