Patricia Fox

Marietta, GA

#22 Mar 30, 2007
Cami wrote:
Why would someone plant a miniscule amount of degraded DNA? That just defies logic to me anyway.
Cami, LOL. You are exactly right in my opinion..If someone were going to plant DNA, it looks like they would have at least planted some that had a match somewhere. Too ridiculous for words.. Planted DNA...geeee...
Kimberly

AOL

#23 Mar 30, 2007
mydearwatson wrote:
if the dna material was frozen, it will degrade. the minute amount was likely added to jbr's blood spots with a syringe.
Here's how I see it; Patsy had a party on the 23rd. She had a houseful of guests. JR played bartender. Patsy told Linda HPugh to take the following day off. LHP never cleaned up from that party...who did? Patsy never said anything about cleaning up...so, I suspect when the time came, JR remembered his bartending gig and all those wonderful DNA laden glasses upstairs. I think he found a glass on a table or corner near his bar and remembered Old So-and-So drank from that glass, and he simply wiped the new bloomers around the rim of that glass. And hence, foreign DNA!
When asked about the guestlist from that party, JR said he couldn't 'recall' who all was there. Desperate times call for desperate measures!
Yacky

Phoenix, AZ

#24 Mar 30, 2007
LOLOLO. YOu are a JOKE! I have to say one of the dumbest POSTERS I've ever seen.
joejam

Oklahoma City, OK

#26 Mar 30, 2007
good one Kimberly :) Everyone loves a conspiracy, huh?......planted dna, foreign material, palm prints, hi-tech, sas shoes. I love it also, don't let it fool ya.
Kimberly

AOL

#27 Mar 30, 2007
Yacky wrote:
LOLOLO. YOu are a JOKE! I have to say one of the dumbest POSTERS I've ever seen.
LOLOLO. talking to yourself again?
Henrietta McPhee

Bristol, UK

#28 Mar 30, 2007
joejam wrote:
good one Kimberly :) Everyone loves a conspiracy, huh?......planted dna, foreign material, palm prints, hi-tech, sas shoes. I love it also, don't let it fool ya.
It's not a conspiracy. It's what is known in routine police work as EVIDENCE, not feelings and emotions.
drew

Hemel Hempstead, UK

#29 Mar 30, 2007
Hope this link works. This might give some a bigger laugh?

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v27/n02/sedl01_.html

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#30 Mar 30, 2007
Henrietta McPhee wrote:
<quoted text>
Fleet White's DNA has never been entered into CODIS. How do you know that Fleet isn't the Californian Zodiac killer from way back, or even if he was mixed up in the MacDonald murders?
Correct me if I am wrong, but did you not agree that the original list of people tested very early on in the investigation had their DNA checked against the sample that was finally entered into CODIS?

If you did not agree to this, then how can you say John and Patsy were cleared by DNA?
Patricia Fox

Atlanta, GA

#31 Mar 30, 2007
Yacky wrote:
LOLOLO. YOu are a JOKE! I have to say one of the dumbest POSTERS I've ever seen.
Sorry, you did not get my joke. Maybe you have been living in the desert too long...LOL
Dots

AOL

#32 Mar 31, 2007
Here is how I see it. A human being folded the panties into the package. Before that, a human being or ten sewed the garment together. Before that a human being or 20 spred out the whole cloth to cut the garment pattern. Before that a human or ten delivered the fabric to the manufacturing facility. Before that a human beingn or ten made the fabric.

And you wonder why foreign DNA was found on panties?

COME ON !!
candy

East Lansing, MI

#33 Feb 11, 2009
DNA Ties 1984 Halloween Murder of 2 Girls to Dead Man

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,491245,00...

Since: Oct 08

Kamloops, Canada

#34 Feb 11, 2009
Sexual assault victims with foreign, male, stranger dna on their little girl pants - un-sourced dna. Years and years gone by - fourteen. I guess, sometimes it does mean something.

But, not with Jonbenet, eh?

AK
jahazafat

Troy, ID

#35 Feb 12, 2009
Yes, semen and or blood on dead bodies always means something.

Incomplete, old degraded DNA from a partial skin cell does not. Especially on a dead kid who wasn't toilet trained and wore other kid's underwear frequently. Especially on a kid who was found dead in underwear that was too big to be her own. Especially when the investigation failed to consider Michigan or Atlanta girls as the source for this borrowed pair. They only checked girls from Boulder yet this was a child that lived a fourth of the year in Michigan and spent considerable time in Atlanta.

Every criminal held behind bars will be free if inconsequential dna that is a part of life is considered. The negligible amounts are everywhere on everything humans come in contact with and most human contact is not criminal in nature or related to murder. A baseline has to established for what is normal like insect particles in commercial baked goods. The technology has gotten ahead of itself.
FoolsGold

Bonita Springs, FL

#36 Feb 12, 2009
Dots wrote:
A human being folded the panties into the package. You wonder why foreign DNA was found on panties?
Even in Vietnam the factories use machinery. Do you really think that minute amount of dna from a factory worker got all over the outer garments as well? Do you really think the factory worker somehow got his dna in only those portions of the panties that were later to be the sites of blood droplets but did not get his dna in other areas of the panties that have been tested?
FoolsGold

Bonita Springs, FL

#37 Feb 12, 2009
candy wrote:
DNA Ties 1984 Halloween Murder of 2 Girls to Dead Man
To a man who is NOW dead!
why_nut

Forest Hills, NY

#38 Feb 12, 2009
FoolsGold wrote:
<quoted text>Even in Vietnam the factories use machinery. Do you really think that minute amount of dna from a factory worker got all over the outer garments as well? Do you really think the factory worker somehow got his dna in only those portions of the panties that were later to be the sites of blood droplets but did not get his dna in other areas of the panties that have been tested?
Here is a picture of some men working in a sweat shop sewing clothing. I want everyone to look at this picture and then convince me that, under the circumstances, anyone believes these men were not leaving DNA all over the clothing crammed into the same room as themselves.

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j149/whynut...

Since: Oct 08

Kamloops, Canada

#39 Feb 12, 2009
Convince me that this photo is relevant to the DNA found commingled in the victim’s blood, on her longjohns and under the fingernails of both hands.

OR

Convince me that “these men” in the photo you linked to were “leaving their DNA all over the clothing crammed into the same room as themselves.”

OR

Provide me with the studies that support your claim that DNA is as amenable to transfer as you seem to be suggesting.

TIA

AK
Rashomon

Germany

#40 Feb 13, 2009
Anti-K wrote:
Convince me that this photo is relevant to the DNA found commingled in the victim’s blood, on her longjohns and under the fingernails of both hands.
OR
Convince me that “these men” in the photo you linked to were “leaving their DNA all over the clothing crammed into the same room as themselves.”
OR
Provide me with the studies that support your claim that DNA is as amenable to transfer as you seem to be suggesting.
TIA
AK
The photo Why_Nut linked to is convincing enough. As for studies, Dr. Lee himself tested factory- new underwear and said foreign DNA on them is a frequent finding.
FoolsGold

Bonita Springs, FL

#41 Feb 13, 2009
I don't know about "frequent" finding but the critical data is what percentage of the total surface area has that pre-packaged dna. Then calculate what the odds are that a blood drop that is added to the panties has been added over some EXISTING dna.
ALL the testing that has been done has involved not only the blood spot area but also a 'test swatch' cut from elsewhere. The test swatches that are cut out and initialed by the examiner have not shown any prior existing but foreign dna.
Rashomon

Germany

#42 Feb 13, 2009
FoolsGold wrote:
I don't know about "frequent" finding but the critical data is what percentage of the total surface area has that pre-packaged dna. Then calculate what the odds are that a blood drop that is added to the panties has been added over some EXISTING dna.
ALL the testing that has been done has involved not only the blood spot area but also a 'test swatch' cut from elsewhere. The test swatches that are cut out and initialed by the examiner have not shown any prior existing but foreign dna.
Now put two and two together. It was Dr. Lee's opinion that the foreign DNA was artifact, right?
So logic dictates that test swabs revealed the foreign DNA on other parts of the underwear too. In short, Dr. Lee had a reason for arriving at the factory worker sneeze conclusion.
For example, when you sneeze in a paper tissue and someone else leaves a drop of their blood on the same tissue later, this blod will be comingled with your DNA too.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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
JonBenet Investigation (Nov '11) 3 hr JBI 1,617
"Note-Free Case Discussion" 8 hr Legal__Eagle 92
Note-odd detail? 8 hr Note 2,400
Upcoming National Enquirer story - JonBenet Ram... (Oct '10) 9 hr berrytea333 35
koldkase patsy wrote the note 20 hr Legal__Eagle 18
Haapy Thanksgiving Wed Capricorn 15
ICU2 's Child Trafficking Tue Legal__Eagle 6
More from around the web