DNA discussed in Carnes' decision
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]
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?
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.
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!

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)