I don't have access to that report at this moment but will say I was under-impressed with the results because they were.... I am going to use the word "muddy". The child had all kinds of stuff under her nails, I think. Yes, there was foreign DNA there but - - who knows when she scrubbed her nails last?
Which makes me have to say - - I have avoided this subject a bit because - - - EVERYONE she was in contact with on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day, IMO, should have given DNA samples to be used just for elimination purposes. That mean Cox and Gaston, Fleet White's guests, should have given samples. After all, they were with her for hours on Christmas afternoon and we have no idea if either of them held her on their lap or played a game with her or.... we just don't know.
The DNA reports from the panties and long johns were much more straight forward.
I can see the possibility of someone leaving their DNA on the outside of the long johns in an innocent way - - who folded the laundry, for example.
But co-mingled with the victim's blood, found in her panties.... i see NO way that was an innocent deposit and that is why the reward I am offering relates only to THAT profile.
01-31-2017, 01:28 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-31-2017, 01:30 PM by Moop.)
So the DNA under her fingernails didn't match the other 2 found on long johns and panties? For some reason, I thought it did.
In the autopsy photos of her neck, it almost looked nail marks from trying to pry off the rope. I really hoped the DNA under her fingernails was her trying to get her killer... but with little kids, who knows where they put their hands lol.
This is one of the many things that need to be absolutely clarified, in order to solve this crime, and take the focus of guilt off the Ramsey's. Just curious why it is taking 20 years for the truth to begin to surface. And why there are no serious penalties for withholding evidence and losing and incriminating innocent victims.
02-18-2017, 09:20 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-18-2017, 09:23 PM by Toth.
Edit Reason: spelling.
Please.. I know its difficult and I am also guilty of it, but when it comes to ANY forensic evidence please do not use the dreaded word 'match'. It does not mean to a forensic scientist what jurors think it means.
If you ink someone's finger and roll it over two separate pieces of paper it is quite likely that the two separate prints will NOT match, even though they are obviously from the same finger.
As to DNA its 'included' or 'excluded' or indeterminate, but its not match. Any dna from a mixed or potentially mixed sample is based partly on conjecture.
DNA under an adult females nails might be explained away as passion but dna under a child's fingernails would probably be from a defensive gesture, though other activities could be involved depending how deep the dna was scraped. Shaking hands with Fleet White would NOT get his dna "under her nails", scratching at an attacker in a weak and futile manner might. Rarely is the debris from a fingernail pristine but for the attacker's dna. An adult female might have had a recent manicure or might have recently "done her nails' or atleast used a nail brush, a child is less like to engage in such activity, but evidence does not have to be pristine to yield clues. Dandruff, materials from pets, materials from toys, etc can provide confusion but PCR replicates dna from any source, innocent or guilty.
I understand there was a lot of stuff under her nails and that the DNA found in her panties could be among the mixture found under her nails.
I am trying to sort all this out but was told in simple language that if Fred and Christine touched an item, the letters of their names might be all over the object. along with the letters found in JonBenet. So if Frisbone was a suspect, since all the letters in his name can be found on the object, he could not be cleared. But Vazmut could definitely be cleared because NONE of his markers (letter) are present. It gets trickier if the sample is weak and the suspect's name is Tony because 75% of his markers are present.
In the end, I expect to be in possession of all the DNA documents released to Charlie Brennan in the near future and hope to study them and figure out what is what there. What items were tested - - and... I am sure I will have a lot of questions because the few reports I have now have me scratching my head. Why check the shoulders of the pink nightgown she was not wearing and does that mean they tested the white shirt as well?
It was strong enough to put in codis years ago and the new tests should be stronger still.