Colorado CODIS hits from DNA

Posted in the JonBenet Ramsey Forum

First Prev
of 10
Next Last
candy

East Lansing, MI

#1 Jun 8, 2012
How likely is an CODIS DNA hit in Colorado? That's what Team Ramsey has been touting for years, that a DNA hit is going to produce the "intruder killer". Yet, that DNA has been in CODIS for EIGHT AND A HALF YEARS with NO dna hit. Here are some VERY intersting statistics from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI) about the ACTUAL numbers regarding CODIS "hits" from DNA for Colorado. What are the ACTUAL FACTS regarding what percentage of DNA uploaded from Colorado actually yields a hit in CODIS?

These are current statistics: "The Colorado Bureau of Investigation has received 65,641 DNA samples from felony arrestees. DNA samples can only be analyzed once criminal cases have been filed. Today 54,750 have been processed resulting in (ONLY)293 CODIS hits. This 293 figure is for ALL types of cases" (COMBINED). That is a percentage of a MINISCULE 0.53 percent. Just to let you know the REALITY of the situation.

“2009, 2011, 2012”

Since: Aug 11

Roll Tide - Good Luck, Tide!

#3 Jun 8, 2012
candy wrote:
How likely is an CODIS DNA hit in Colorado? That's what Team Ramsey has been touting for years, that a DNA hit is going to produce the "intruder killer". Yet, that DNA has been in CODIS for EIGHT AND A HALF YEARS with NO dna hit. Here are some VERY intersting statistics from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI) about the ACTUAL numbers regarding CODIS "hits" from DNA for Colorado. What are the ACTUAL FACTS regarding what percentage of DNA uploaded from Colorado actually yields a hit in CODIS?
These are current statistics: "The Colorado Bureau of Investigation has received 65,641 DNA samples from felony arrestees. DNA samples can only be analyzed once criminal cases have been filed. Today 54,750 have been processed resulting in (ONLY)293 CODIS hits. This 293 figure is for ALL types of cases" (COMBINED). That is a percentage of a MINISCULE 0.53 percent. Just to let you know the REALITY of the situation.
Candy, do you have any idea how the figures from Colorado compare with those of other states, especially states whose numbers fall near the same 65,641 samples that Colorado has obtained? Or probably the best comparison would be to the 54,750 that have been processed? This would give us an accurate picture of how Colorado stacks up against other states.

What I'm thinking is that for Colorado to have such a small number of CODIS hits, can there be a flaw in the system there?

Since: May 11

United States

#4 Jun 8, 2012
candy wrote:
How likely is an CODIS DNA hit in Colorado? That's what Team Ramsey has been touting for years, that a DNA hit is going to produce the "intruder killer". Yet, that DNA has been in CODIS for EIGHT AND A HALF YEARS with NO dna hit. Here are some VERY intersting statistics from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI) about the ACTUAL numbers regarding CODIS "hits" from DNA for Colorado. What are the ACTUAL FACTS regarding what percentage of DNA uploaded from Colorado actually yields a hit in CODIS?
These are current statistics: "The Colorado Bureau of Investigation has received 65,641 DNA samples from felony arrestees. DNA samples can only be analyzed once criminal cases have been filed. Today 54,750 have been processed resulting in (ONLY)293 CODIS hits. This 293 figure is for ALL types of cases" (COMBINED). That is a percentage of a MINISCULE 0.53 percent. Just to let you know the REALITY of the situation.
seems the DNA owner is not a career criminal...maybe the DNA owner wasn't much older than JB and has yet to commit a crime? Or one of the many adults that helped JB in the bathroom?
There's no way of knowing whether that DNA got there innocently or not without knowing the owner of it. Too bad the Ramseys weren't more forthcoming and helpful to the police by telling them everyone and everywhere JB came in contact with.
learnin

Overbrook, KS

#5 Jun 8, 2012
DNA wrote:
<quoted text>
JBI team predict the killer to live in the North West part of the US. If so our profile predicts the killer to be a artiest and climbing/instuctors. That said, he will only work as a instructor at schools that do not test for DNA as now many schools do test for DNA.
Team JBI
A one time killer who was not an acquaintance of the family, huh? What was this one time, stranger, killer's motive?
candy

East Lansing, MI

#6 Jun 9, 2012
It doesn't make any sense to me for the Ramsey case killer not to have committed any other felonies, and he can't be anyone "random" since he had all kinds of personal references in the ransom note "good southern common sense" "$118,000", "fat cat" "John".

For Old South, I don't know how they compare to other states. The best comparison would be to the 54,750 samples processed. That's the number I used to calculate the percentage of DNA hits.

There is a question in my post that I left in it to see if "Mama" is really a DNA expert or not. Why has there been 65,641 DNA samples taken, but only 54,750 processed? The answer is NOT backlog, it's something a DNA expert knows the answer to.

Since: Feb 12

Lihue, HI

#7 Jun 9, 2012
Even IF you got a hit from a criminal or former criminal, it would be best not to get your hopes high. This case is NOT a DNA case.

Again, it is not unlawful to touch longjohns or underwear.

IF they got the alleged DNA from the garrote, or from semen, or from in JB's body cavities, it would be a different story, but that is not the case. A DNA match only proves that the contrubor's DNA was in contact with the items where it was found.
CC

Since: May 11

United States

#8 Jun 9, 2012
Bakatari wrote:
Even IF you got a hit from a criminal or former criminal, it would be best not to get your hopes high. This case is NOT a DNA case.
Again, it is not unlawful to touch longjohns or underwear.
IF they got the alleged DNA from the garrote, or from semen, or from in JB's body cavities, it would be a different story, but that is not the case. A DNA match only proves that the contrubor's DNA was in contact with the items where it was found.
CC
The DNA from the garotte is the only DNA that really matters, IMO. Both parents said they never saw it before, so there's no plausible answer if their DNA's on that. I can't imagine why the results of that test haven't been released, IF the garotte was even tested.

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#9 Jun 9, 2012
candy wrote:
It doesn't make any sense to me for the Ramsey case killer not to have committed any other felonies, and he can't be anyone "random" since he had all kinds of personal references in the ransom note "good southern common sense" "$118,000", "fat cat" "John".

For Old South, I don't know how they compare to other states. The best comparison would be to the 54,750 samples processed. That's the number I used to calculate the percentage of DNA hits.

There is a question in my post that I left in it to see if "Mama" is really a DNA expert or not. Why has there been 65,641 DNA samples taken, but only 54,750 processed? The answer is NOT backlog, it's something a DNA expert knows the answer to.
I am not a DNA expert, nor have I EVER claimed to be one....not sure how you came to that conclusion.:o/

“Sandy Stranger killed JonBenet”

Since: Jan 08

Not Boulder, Co.

#10 Jun 9, 2012
realTopaz wrote:
<quoted text>
The DNA from the garotte is the only DNA that really matters, IMO. Both parents said they never saw it before, so there's no plausible answer if their DNA's on that. I can't imagine why the results of that test haven't been released, IF the garotte was even tested.
It wasn't a garrote, it was a suspension device. If it was tested the results weren't released. The released DNA info was a ruse by Mary Lacy.
The Truth Hurts

Novi, MI

#11 Jun 9, 2012
Mama2JML wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not a DNA expert, nor have I EVER claimed to be one....not sure how you came to that conclusion.:o/
Maybe it's got something to do with how you come off like a know it all in the DNA department. Just a wild guess... ;)

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#12 Jun 9, 2012
candy wrote:
There is a question in my post that I left in it to see if "Mama" is really a DNA expert or not. Why has there been 65,641 DNA samples taken, but only 54,750 processed? The answer is NOT backlog, it's something a DNA expert knows the answer to.
The answer appears to be in your original post, "The Colorado Bureau of Investigation has received 65,641 DNA samples from felony arrestees. DNA SAMPLES CAN ONLY BE ANALYZED ONCE CRIMINAL CASES HAVE BEEN FILED. Today 54,750 have been processed...". So, it seems that ~10-11 thousand felony arrestees have not had criminal cases filed against them?
candy

East Lansing, MI

#13 Jun 9, 2012
Mama2JML wrote:
<quoted text>
The answer appears to be in your original post, "The Colorado Bureau of Investigation has received 65,641 DNA samples from felony arrestees. DNA SAMPLES CAN ONLY BE ANALYZED ONCE CRIMINAL CASES HAVE BEEN FILED. Today 54,750 have been processed...". So, it seems that ~10-11 thousand felony arrestees have not had criminal cases filed against them?
Some pro Ramsey posters said you were saying you were a DNA expert.

No, the key is FELONY. John Doe is arrested for a FELONY. His DNA is taken when he is booked. That DNA goes into a database in Grand Junction, CO where it is HELD, NOT PROCESSED. Then the case is sent to the DA's office. IF or WHEN the DA decides to charge the case as a FELONY, the samples are transferred from Grand Junction to Denver, who sends them to CODIS. That 11,000 difference is from cases where the DA DID NOT charge the crime as a felony, rather a misdemeanor, in which case the DNA was not processed or ever uploaded into CODIS. If the felony arrestee was ACQUITTED, his DNA STILL was in CODIS from the time the case was filed as a felony, until he was acquitted. That person may ask for his DNA to be EXPUNGED from CODIS.

The differential again between samples taken versus samples processed is from cases not tried as a felony by the DA.
candy

East Lansing, MI

#14 Jun 9, 2012
Old South was asking about DNA samples, hits between states. The FBI has this, and somehting they call and "offender profile". They say ffender profiles include "Convicted Offender, Arrestee, Detainee, and Legal profiles at NDIS." In this case, the number for Colorado is over 200,000. Their key metric is for INVESTIGATION AIDED by profiles in the CODIS DNA database.

The key statistics for me are:

"The National DNA Index (NDIS) contains over 10,718,700 offender profiles and 427,500 forensic profiles as of April 2012

As of April 2012, CODIS has produced over 178,300 hits assisting in more than 171,000 investigations."

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/codis/ndis-st...
candy

East Lansing, MI

#15 Jun 9, 2012
The percentage of all hits nationwide from samples isn't that much different in Colorado. In Colorado, it's .053 percent, just over half of one percent from all hits, and nationwide it's 1.59 percent of all hits.
Heloise

Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK

#16 Jun 9, 2012
Is the regulation of DNA storage a federal thing or a state thing? I mean, does, say, California have different rules for whose DNA can be stored than, say, Maine?

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#17 Jun 9, 2012
candy wrote:
The percentage of all hits nationwide from samples isn't that much different in Colorado. In Colorado, it's .053 percent, just over half of one percent from all hits, and nationwide it's 1.59 percent of all hits.
Actually, that's an incredible difference, Candy. The natl. avg. of "hits" is exactly 3 times more than that of CO. This indicates that some states may get 6, 9, 12, etc. "hits"/wk. as opposed to CO's 2. I will look for other states' averages as you now have me curious about the efficiency of the CBI with regard to DNA storage, processing, analyses, etc. Perhaps some states have exemplary procedures in place and others, like CO, are "below par"?

With regard to your previous reply to me: Thanks for providing an explanation. My statement should have been, "~11,000 felony arrestees have not had *FELONY* criminal cases filed against them." These remaining felony arrestees may have had misdemeanor cases filed against them, but there also may be some arrestees who had no criminal cases filed against them at all, right?

In response to your original post:
Regardless of what "team Ramsey" is doing (or not doing), I would like to know how extensively LE is working on and investigating this crime. If they are just waiting on a CODIS hit, that would be incredibly unjust, neglectful, and VERY disheartening...

Lastly, I don't know who/how/etc. or when it came to be that I, supposedly, claim to be a DNA expert?... I am not, and I have never even implied such...:o/

“2009, 2011, 2012”

Since: Aug 11

Roll Tide - Good Luck, Tide!

#18 Jun 9, 2012
Candy, I see now how the word "felony" can change the stutus concerning whether a suspect's DNA is entered into CODIS.

So, in trying to see the different ways DNA is handled, say we're looking at some 60 to 100 POI's in the Ramsey case, who, according to BPD, all gave samples of their DNA for testing. Yet, many posters believe that MOST of these samples were not tested. Yet, if LE is now depending upon a CODIS hit in order to solve the case, I should think these circumstances would REQUIRE that ALL samples gathered would be tested.

In this case, would you agree that ALL DNA given by EVERY PERSON in regard to the Ramsey case would HAVE TO BE SENT IN FOR testing? Thus settling any question that a person's "DNA was taken but NOT tested"?

“2009, 2011, 2012”

Since: Aug 11

Roll Tide - Good Luck, Tide!

#19 Jun 9, 2012
Mama2JML wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, that's an incredible difference, Candy. The natl. avg. of "hits" is exactly 3 times more than that of CO. This indicates that some states may get 6, 9, 12, etc. "hits"/wk. as opposed to CO's 2.

I will look for other states' averages as you now have me curious about the efficiency of the CBI with regard to DNA storage, processing, analyses, etc. Perhaps some states have exemplary procedures in place and others, like CO, are "below par"?
This is why I asked the question about how Colorado stacks up against other states! I have always felt that there is something amiss regarding the efficiency of the CBI with regard to SOMETHING concerning their methods of storage, processing, analyses, etc.(just as you said).

I have a reason for being suspicious since several years ago I saw an article in some publication stating that the CBI was under investigation for the way their lab processes and handles evidence given them for analyses (that might not be the exact terminology in the article, but it IS close). I was always alert to a follow-up stating the outcome of the investigation but I never saw such a follow-up. But that also made me leary of the work of the lab under the direction of Dr. LeBarge and/or Dr. Meyer (I'm never certain who is/was in charge of WHAT).

For example, seeing how Dr. Meyer was so lax in his conducting the autopsy and using non-sterile instruments, equipment, etc, I feel that his subordinates would be even more inclined to be lax or derelict in their responsibility to use the utmost care in performing their work in a sterile environment.

I just have had my doubts about the efficiency of the CBI for a very long time!

Since: Feb 12

Lihue, HI

#20 Jun 9, 2012
realTopaz wrote:
<quoted text>
The DNA from the garotte is the only DNA that really matters, IMO. Both parents said they never saw it before, so there's no plausible answer if their DNA's on that. I can't imagine why the results of that test haven't been released, IF the garotte was even tested.
You are correct. Since the garrote is the murder weapon, DNA from it would put the contributor directly in contact with the murder weapon. All the other DNA found does not possibly connect with the crime.

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#21 Jun 9, 2012
Ole South wrote:
<quoted text>This is why I asked the question about how Colorado stacks up against other states! I have always felt that there is something amiss regarding the efficiency of the CBI with regard to SOMETHING concerning their methods of storage, processing, analyses, etc.(just as you said).

I have a reason for being suspicious since several years ago I saw an article in some publication stating that the CBI was under investigation for the way their lab processes and handles evidence given them for analyses (that might not be the exact terminology in the article, but it IS close). I was always alert to a follow-up stating the outcome of the investigation but I never saw such a follow-up. But that also made me leary of the work of the lab under the direction of Dr. LeBarge and/or Dr. Meyer (I'm never certain who is/was in charge of WHAT).

For example, seeing how Dr. Meyer was so lax in his conducting the autopsy and using non-sterile instruments, equipment, etc, I feel that his subordinates would be even more inclined to be lax or derelict in their responsibility to use the utmost care in performing their work in a sterile environment.

I just have had my doubts about the efficiency of the CBI for a very long time!
I don't subscribe to the non-sterile autopsy theory at all....except that Meyer may have used the same clippers on each fingernail.(still only two profiles were found: JBR and ANON. which was consistent with the profile in the panties) Other than that, I do not agree with the speculative theories incorporating the use of unsterile instruments, surfaces, etc.

Actually, I believe the issue with the CBI has much to do with funding...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 10
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
"Note-Free Case Discussion" 8 min Capricorn 94
JonBenet Investigation (Nov '11) 4 hr JBI 1,617
Note-odd detail? 9 hr Note 2,400
Upcoming National Enquirer story - JonBenet Ram... (Oct '10) 10 hr berrytea333 35
koldkase patsy wrote the note 21 hr Legal__Eagle 18
Haapy Thanksgiving Wed Capricorn 15
ICU2 's Child Trafficking Tue Legal__Eagle 6
More from around the web