DNA discussed in Carnes' decision
#1
The coroner took nail clippings from JonBenet. [i]Male DNA was found under JonBenet's right hand fingernail that does not match that of any Ramsey. (SMF ¶ 174; PSMF ¶ 174.) Defendants also assert that male DNA was found under Jon-Benet's left hand fingernail, which also does not match that of any Ramsey. (SMF ¶ 173.) In addition, male DNA was found in JonBenet's underwear that does not match that of any Ramsey and has not yet been sourced. (SMF ¶¶ 175, 178; PSMF ¶¶ 75, 178.) The Boulder Police Department has yet to identify the male whose DNA was found at the crime scene. (SMF ¶77; PSMF ¶77.) Finally, a Caucasian "pubic or auxiliary" hair was found on the blanket covering JonBenet's body. (SMF ¶79; PSMF ¶79.) The hair does not match that of any Ramsey and has not been sourced. (SMF ¶ 80; PSMF ¶ 180.)[/i]
Reply
#2
Wonder why the pubic hair is rarely mentioned? I had forgotten about that until you just reminded me. What explanation could there be for a male pubic hair being on the blanket that doesn't match the family except for an intruder?
Reply
#3
Well, first they said it was a pubic hair - and we know they not only took pubic hair samples from John and patsy but also (in Thomas' book) that they were taking pubic hairs from other possible suspects - - in NC they sought to get one from John Brewer Eustace.

Why has that hair been dropped from the discussion? Because it doesn't fit the BORG theory. Simple as that. But the investigators looking to solve this are more than willing to discuss that hair. It is still good evidence.
Reply
#4
I remember reading a BORG theory at one point saying the pubic hair didn't belong to any of the Ramsey's so it probably just belonged to one of JAR's college buddies who spent the night at one point. Whatever they have to do to make the evidence fit their theory! So frustrating!
Reply
#5
In Federal Judge Julie Carnes' decision, she made it clear that hair was not sourced. Since both Hunter and Beckner were deposed, I expect she would have been told if it had been. Not positive, but I think her report should be a pretty good place to get some truth.
Reply
#6
(03-08-2017, 06:41 PM)jameson245 Wrote: In Federal Judge Julie Carnes' decision, she made it clear that hair was not sourced.  Since both Hunter and Beckner were deposed, I expect she would have been told if it had been.  Not positive, but I think her report should be a pretty good place to get some truth.

Plus all suspects were made to give samples for comparison. Why do so if you don't have something to compare it with?
Reply
#7
Exactly. The BORG says ignore it but that would be foolish in a murder case. A stray pubic hair found in JAR's room might not be important but this was found with the body. Moronic to dismiss that as a red herring unless there was overwhelming evidence proving who the suspect was and that wasn't his. THEN I'd wonder if he didn't carry it in from a sex partner.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)