Forensic evidence

Copied from Websleuths

Over the past week, I have seen several discussions which discuss "the fact" that the DNA came from a "white male".

We do NOT know this to be a fact. The source of the "caucasian DNA" is Lin Wood and a few newspapers who probably picked it up from him. There is no official report which refers to the DNA being from a "white male" - just that it is "male".

Expert opinions on race and DNA are divided. Race can often be determined from mitochondrial DNA which is found in hair due to the fact that a massive database was created with mtDNA data from known donors and race details were recorded too. mtDNA is copied down the female line and is not as unique as nuclear DNA - i.e. you will have the same mtDNA as your mother and siblings.

However, determining race from nuclear DNA is not so straightforward. Many experts (from the Human Genome Project no less) will simply say that you cannot determine race from nuclear DNA. A scientist whose name escapes me claims to have developed a technique for ascertaining race from nuclear DNA by using genes for certain health problems. For example, the gene for sickle cell anaemia would suggest that the person is black. He published his paper but as of early this year, his research had not been peer reviewed - essential in science. A scientific discovery is not considered sound until other scientists have replicated the research and stated "Yep - he/she is right".

Here are some reasons to suspect that the DNA is NOT known to be from a white male:-

1. Tom Bennett did not say that it was white/caucasian in John Mark Karr's arrest warrant. Only that it was male. As Miss Marple says, surely if they knew the DNA was from a WHITE male, that would be a significant fact to mention in the arrest warrant of a WHITE male?

2. When Peter Boyles asked Henry Lee about the DNA being "caucasian", Henry Lee said he hadn't heard that - just that it was male.

3. Tom Bennett and Mary Lacy have both stated publicly that the DNA might not be the killer's.

4. The Asian sneeze theory has been repeated many times by the media - so why hasn't someone from the Ramsey camp come forward and vehemently disputed it if the DNA is known to be caucasian? Surely Lou Smit or Lin Wood would be shouting it from the highest hill if it were the case?

They aren't. The only people who discuss "caucasian" DNA are the RST - Ramsey Spin Team. A group of people who unfortunately appear to be so besotted with the Ramseys that they seem willing to turn a blind eye to some very basic evidential facts. People like Michael Tracey - who makes Ramsey works of fiction and sells them as "documentaries". Groups of people at jameson's and Margoo's forums who fall at the feet of the Ramseys, Lin Wood and Lou Smit and who will tie themselves in knots in their attempts to rationalise non-exculpatory evidence and Ramsey behaviour.

http://www.webbsleuths.com/cgi-bin/...1&om=1513&omm=0

The fact is, that we do NOT know that the DNA is caucasian. The only reliable sources we have about the DNA do not mention the word "caucasian". Therefore any source which tries to tell you it IS caucasian should be treated with a great deal of mistrust.

As Mary Lacy says - people who lie about one thing are usually lying about other things. ;-)

 

There was a bathroom at the bottom of the stairs in the basement, Elle. I may be wrong, but I'm thinking it even had a shower. I'll have to check that, though.

 

Nope, no shower in these diagrams, but you can see the bathroom:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer2/primer10_blue.html

 

Let's add the fact that the DNA was so degraded it just barely made it into the CODIS database. Why should anyone believe that (even if it was possible to identify a person's race from DNA) this degraded sample would contain the correct markers to identify a caucasian.

You can file the "caucasian DNA" myth in the same trash heap as the "stun gun" fantasy--nothing more than wishful RST delusions. :floor:

 

Well, Margoo has come up with a brilliant argument for the DNA being "caucasion": it sure wasn't ASIAN!

I couldn't make this stuff up in my wildest imagination.

 

And she knows this....how? Oh I get it. Margoo = RST = "I just KNOW the Ramseys are innocent..."

 

I saw an Enquirer while out, but I didn't buy it. The headlines said dna was linked to two people.

 

I just found something interesting which might point to a toilet rage scenario preceding the head bash (bold type mine):

So JB's empty bladder might indicate that she did in fact shed urine before the head blow was delivered.
So maybe the toilet rage theory isn't so far-fetched after all?
I know that it has been argued (also by me) "suppose JonBenet shed post-mortem urine, why would the Ramseys be so dumb as to leave her in the urine-stained size 12-underwear if the cause of her death had in fact been toilet rage?"
But perhaps the Ramseys, in their panic, didn't even realize that JB had shed some post-mortem urine?

Maybe we are attributing far too much logic and reasoning to the staging efforts of the Ramseys, while in reality it was merely a jumbled mess resulting from their panicky (and stressed for time) state of mind?
At least that's what Delmar England pointed out in one of his e-mails to me, and what he wrote really got me thinking.

For I always want to fit it all together, with a 'logical' explanation for every piece of the puzzle, but maybe logic has to take a back seat if we really try to put ourselves in the Ramseys' shoes - parents who found themselves in a "point of no return situation", knowing that one of them had done irreparale damage to their child, and who, not wanting to take responsibility for what had happened, frantically tried to escape justice.

Their ransom note was a wild and improbable concoction, and the garrote/ligature scene was clumsily staged. There is indeed not much logic in e. g. leaving a 17-inch space of cord between wrist ligatures.

Although JB had obviously been the victim of chronic sexual abuse, still the rage attack on her could have been unconnected to that abuse.
In short, JB's sexual abuser needn't automatically have been the person who delivered the head blow in a rage.

But maybe JB's sexual abuser (I believe it was John) profited from the rage attack on JB, because Patsy (without realizing it), had forever silenced JB as a witness who might spill the beans.

 

Rash, that is what I have always said - that, if Patsy was the one who caused the head wound, then John profited and that is why he has always looked like the cat that ate the canary. If he helped Patsy cover up the accident and keep out of jail, she would have been under his control for all these years, or he could have told LE what happened.

But if Patsy didn't know about the sexual abuse, why did she react with defensive statements when told about it? She must have known something by that time, at least, because instead of being shocked, disgusted, angry at the perpetrator, freaked out - all normal reactions - she got defensive and questioned the information instead. That is what someone with knowledge would do.

 

Particularly if she might have been the abuser.

 

Correction. It wasn't an Enquirer, maybe it was the Examiner.

 

I remember Redd Herring's plan. His site was incredible. Thanks KK. Yes, it looks like there was a bathroom there, but thinking again of a nine year old doing the washing and the redressing just doesn't fit, does it? Not all by himself. It had to be a family affair.

 

Help

Does anyone have the stats for how many people the BPD investigated etc? I should have this easily to hand, but I don't!

 

OK, here is the Boulder PD press release earlier this year where the lawyers who assisted the BPD during the investigation early in the case take issue with DeMuth's irresponsible lies about how he was prevented from investigating intruders by the BPD, calling his claim ridiculous. In this press release, it is stated that the BPD investigated over 160 suspects:

http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5786&Itemid=579

Is this what you wanted, Jayelles?

 

Hi Jayelles, Also the Mary Lacy 8/29/06 press conference you transcribed (on the sticky) tape 7. ML says 200 suspects seriously looked at by the BPD and DA's office.

 

Thanks guys. That is helpful, but I was sure there was a stat count somehwere that listed the number of people who were tested for DNA, handwriting, interviewed etc. Maybe I dreamt it!

 

I'm trying to think...maybe it was Schiller's last documentary? Is there a transcript of that? I'll try to remember, because I think someone did do that run-down once or twice.... Thinking...thinking....

 

You have been been digging deeply rashomon. This is a very interesting article. I makes my head spin trying to sort it all out. This is what Delmar England stated. The head injury came first and the strangulation later. I believe this may have happened. It's the sexual abuse which ties me in knots (?).

 

You know what? I wonder if anyone minds if I take Rashomon's last posts on the topic which Elle quoted and start a new evidence thread with it: Evidence 2?

I just noticed this one is rather long and I can't remember what's on it anymore without going back and rereading. When I'm doing research and look up old thread, the longer ones take some time. This one has a lot of good stuff on it, but wow, it would take a long time to read it again.

 

OK, Jayelles, this is my last, best effort. I've been at this for some time, and this is the closest I can come to a list of stats. DejeNu compilied it or copied it to FFJ, and ACR put it on her forum as well:

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=7555&page=2&pp=12&highlight=Todd+Hartman

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There there's this article, which I was looking for all evening--of course it was right here at FFJ: