This is wonderful news. I am sure that Patsy is looking on with a huge smile I never thought they were guilty and was disgusted with the way the media treated them.
I am however sure Dr. Hodges is not celebrating. Poor Dr. Hodges, another book bites the dust ~
Oh geez..I forgot about the...I use this term loosely....doctor...
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 9562
Location: Living happily in my "clueless" little world.
victims cryPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 7:14 pm
Wendy Murphy is nuts.... screeching that the dna doesn't mean anything!
On Vacation!
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 9307
DocTarPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 7:27 pm
VC...who is Wendy Murphy?
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 2007
Location: one toke over the line
prolificPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 7:40 pm
DocTar wrote:
VC...who is Wendy Murphy?
You don't know who Wendy Murphy is? Lucky you..
I'm sure if you saw her you would know her..I'll find one of her videos.
Maybe Wendy is a bit worried right now, didn't Lin Wood go after her a while back because of all of the things she said about the Ramsey's?
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 9562
Location: Living happily in my "clueless" little world.
SavannahStarPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 7:42 pm
DocTar wrote:
VC...who is Wendy Murphy?
Radical screeching feminazi bitch.
**SuperStar**
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 21294
Location: Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil
victims cryPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:08 pm
SavannahStar wrote:
Radical screeching feminazi bitch.
Thats it!!!
and of course an attorney
On Vacation!
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 9307
prolificPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:13 pm
SavannahStar wrote:
Radical screeching feminazi bitch.
That's the word I was looking for.. feminazi...fits her to a T
Here's one of her videos defending Nifong...couldn't find any of her tirades about the Ramseys.
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 9562
Location: Living happily in my "clueless" little world.
NoorPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:19 pm
I wonder why the Ramsey's had the need to hire not only one lawyer, but two lawyers, one for him and one for her.
I wonder why they did not want to talk to the detectives for the longest time.
And when they did they brought their lawyers.
I would be banging at the police stations door to talk to the detectives.
I wonder why they "invited" the press to document the funeral of their daughter.
I don't know, but there was some weird stuff going around.
I'm not saying they are guilty, but there are a lot of questions though.
What DNA are they talking about?
The parents where around their kids, so yes there's DNA.
Marco
Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 5201
Location: Ohio
victims cryPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:22 pm
DNA from someone with no match to any of the ramseys.
touch dna was found on the outside of the leggings, which matched the dna in her underwear. NOT from the ramseys!
On Vacation!
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 9307
NoorPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:33 pm
victims cry wrote:
DNA from someone with no match to any of the ramseys.
touch dna was found on the outside of the leggings, which matched the dna in her underwear. NOT from the ramseys!
hummmmm "touch" dna.
Never heard of that before........
I'm sure they found dna in her underwear before.
DNA is DNA , tough dna or not.
weird.
And they got an apology, Wow.
Marco
Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 5201
Location: Ohio
victims cryPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:43 pm
Touch DNA is a new form of DNA, much harder to find, been around about 5 years. It can take dna off things you touch -dead skin cells, etc. However you have to be able to find it first, the lab decided to concentrate on the thighs to the waistband of the leggings since they would have to have been pulled down for dna to get into her panties. They found enough to be able to test and it matched the panty dna..and excluded the ramseys.
On Vacation!
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 9307
DocTarPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:47 pm
marco wrote:
hummmmm "touch" dna.
Never heard of that before........
I'm sure they found dna in her underwear before.
DNA is DNA , tough dna or not.
weird.
And they got an apology, Wow.
Marco, I don't think you are understanding...they have a fairly new dna test that they did not have in years past....they originally found dna in Jon Benet's underwear. It is a fact and has been for 12 years that it did not match any of the Ramsey's dna. The new dna test is for 'touch' dna...the preserved clothing of Jon Benet was touched by someone who first removed it, then put it back on her body. What she was wearing, in particular, her leggings, had this 'touch' dna on it, and this dna also matches the first dna, the stuff on her underwear. And it is not a match with any of the Ramseys...it does not matter a hoot how weird or hinky they behaved...it was not their dna on their daughter's clothing, but the dna from someone else. And an apology goes a ways, but can never ever make up for losing their beloved child, and then being suspected of murdering her for 12 long freaking years, and that means being marked in the media for those 12 long years. Poor Patsy died and went to her grave and lies next to her child, the child she was falsely accused of killing. Can anyone imagine the hell she went through? Justice is slow, but it did prevail. And John Ramsey's comment was that now they have corroberating evidence to continue looking for who did it!
I will never understand how so many good people in this world believed the Boulder LE and the news media when they followed the wrong lead.
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 2007
Location: one toke over the line
FishyPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:48 pm
prolific wrote:
Oh geez..I forgot about the...I use this term loosely....doctor...
LOL....I work with doctors....I like to refer to him as "doc Hodges, et. al Wonderwoman and/or Ms. Betty" Does the craziness ever end?
Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 1695
Location: Texas
MediumRareTBonePosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:55 pm
This is great news!
Will there be enough catsup for all the crow that needs to be eaten?
Last edited by MediumRareTBone on Wed Jul 09, 2008 9:03 pm; edited 1 time in total
**Relentless**
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 3586
Location: celebrating with the Jayhawks!
FishyPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:55 pm
DocTar wrote:
Marco, I don't think you are understanding...they have a fairly new dna test that they did not have in years past....they originally found dna in Jon Benet's underwear. It is a fact and has been for 12 years that it did not match any of the Ramsey's dna. The new dna test is for 'touch' dna...the preserved clothing of Jon Benet was touched by someone who first removed it, then put it back on her body. What she was wearing, in particular, her leggings, had this 'touch' dna on it, and this dna also matches the first dna, the stuff on her underwear. And it is not a match with any of the Ramseys...it does not matter a hoot how weird or hinky they behaved...it was not their dna on their daughter's clothing, but the dna from someone else. And an apology goes a ways, but can never ever make up for losing their beloved child, and then being suspected of murdering her for 12 long freaking years, and that means being marked in the media for those 12 long years. Poor Patsy died and went to her grave and lies next to her child, the child she was falsely accused of killing. Can anyone imagine the hell she went through? Justice is slow, but it did prevail. And John Ramsey's comment was that now they have corroberating evidence to continue looking for who did it!
I will never understand how so many good people in this world believed the Boulder LE and the news media when they followed the wrong lead.
It is beyond strange......I hope this case sets a new presidence for other cases to come!
Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 1695
Location: Texas
DocTarPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 9:00 pm
MediumRareTBone wrote:
This is great news!
Will there be enough catsup for all the crow that needs to eaten?
I am willing to donate a bottle to the cause!
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 2007
Location: one toke over the line
chancePosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 9:06 pm
I am so glad the Ramsey's were cleared with this new DNA test. They really were hung out to dry. Can't imagine what the heck kind of time that was for them loosing their daughter and then being considered suspect. That right their is enough to give a person a heart attack. My gosh what the media did to those poor people was down right indecent. I think the media should give an apology also.
I hope that it will eventually lead to the POS that killed that poor little one.
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 2785
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
MariahPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 9:11 pm
DocTar wrote:
Arubalover, there is a new technology called 'touch' dna testing, that was only recently used on the clothing of Jon Benet....see, there was dna on her panties, and now they have dna on her leggings, where the perp 'touched' them, as he undressed and dressed her. The new dna matches the panties dna. And so far, there is no known match in the system.
What boggles my mind is how Boulder LE were so convinced that the Ramseys were guilty, and how that family has lived for 12 years, first with the pain of losing their child in such a horific way, then being under suspicion of the murder....and all because the Boulder LE reported what they considered to be suspicious, and allowed half truths and outright lies to be broadcast night after night...now...aren't there similarities in this case and Natalee Holloway's case?
Because not just the public but LE won't believe a child could be harmed much less murder in their own home unless it was by someone there already. Usually that meant the parents or siblings. Not unlike the last person to be know to be seen with the victim. If someone else comes along that no one seen, The family or last to be known with them are guilty. There is a case I saw on tv where the husband was the last to be known to see his wife alive. He was arrest and going to trial until a UPS guy came forward to tell about what he saw. An other man with the wife in the front yard.
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 1150
MediumRareTBonePosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 9:12 pm
Fishy wrote:
It is beyond strange......I hope this case sets a new presidence for other cases to come!
ITA! The standard in the media should be the same standard the government is held to - innocent until proven guilty.
**Relentless**
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 3586
Location: celebrating with the Jayhawks!
EzgoingPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:44 pm
Not only were John and Patsy Ramsey vilified for years, but there were also stories, especially in the tabloids, about poor Burke. That poor boy - still in grammar school (?) was persecuted by public and press too. Imagine the horror of that also.
Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 746
RollsPosted:
Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:45 pm
Yet another example of "so sure - and so wrong".
And "Thoughtprint" Hodges? I rejoice that I lived to see the blowtorch put, at least, to this pile of steaming shitbaggery.
Trace DNA was developed by a couple of forensic scientists in Adelaide, South Oz. It has been used here to obtain a least one conviction for murder; sub-microscopic DNA via a pinhole in a rubber glove in the middle of a big smear of the victims blood.
Quote:
Titre du document / Document title
Trace DNA: A review, discussion of theory, and application of the transfer of trace quantities of DNA through skin contact
Auteur(s) / Author(s)
WICKENHEISER Ray A. ;
Résumé / Abstract
Advances in STR PCR DNA profiling technology allow for the analysis of minute quantities of DNA. It is frequently possible to obtain successful DNA results from cellular material transferred from the skin of an individualwho has simply touched an object. Handling objects, such as weapons or other items associated with a crime, touching surfaces, or wearing clothing, may represent sufficient contact to transfer small numbers of DNA bearing cells, or trace DNA, which can be successfully analyzed. With this minimal amount of contact required to yield a suspect profile comes tremendous crime solving potential, and a number of considerations for prudent application, and the maximization of evidentiary value. Evidentiary materials not previously considered must be recognized and preserved, and the resulting DNA type profiles interpreted in their proper forensic context.
Revue / Journal Title
Journal of forensic sciences ISSN 0022-1198 CODEN JFSCAS
Source / Source
2002, vol. 47, no3, pp. 442-450 [9 page(s) (article)]
Langue / Language
Anglais
Joined: 19 Mar 2007
Posts: 1821
Location: Australia
MariahPosted:
Thu Jul 10, 2008 5:34 am
JonBenet investigators must try to find DNA match
By CATHERINE TSAI, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 8 minutes ago
BOULDER, Colo. - Armed with a few invisible skin cells, prosecutors are now certain they have the DNA profile of the man who killed 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey.
ADVERTISEMENT
Finding the man himself is another matter.
Investigators hoping to solve the nearly 12-year-old crime will have to locate a match in a growing national DNA database that currently has more than 5 million offenders' profiles.
How long it might take depends on whether the killer has any major brushes with the law that would make him subject to a mandatory DNA test.
"If this person has no criminal record and has never been DNA-typed in another case, this murderer is going to be on our streets," said Larry Pozner, a Denver attorney and a past president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
The evidence against an unknown "third party" came Wednesday when prosecutors announced that new tests pointed to a mystery attacker and cleared JonBenet's parents and her older brother Burke.
It was a vindication for the Ramsey family, but the girl's mother, Patsy, had not lived long enough to see it. She died of cancer in 2006.
"It has been too many years for this family to have suffered the injustice of being falsely accused of a crime they did not commit," said L. Lin Wood, lawyer for Patsy's husband, John.
John Ramsey found his daughter's strangled and bludgeoned body in the basement of the family's home in Boulder on Dec. 26, 1996. Patsy Ramsey said she found a ransom note demanding $118,000 for her daughter.
For years after the slaying, tabloids and crime shows went after the couple, and then-District Attorney Alex Hunter said in 1997 that the parents were under an "umbrella of suspicion." News reports also cast suspicion on JonBenet's brother, who was 9 when his sister was killed.
Early in the investigation, police found male DNA in a drop of blood on JonBenet's underwear and determined it was not from anyone in her family. Investigators were unable to say who it came from and whether that person was the killer.
In 2003, the Ramseys got a major boost when a federal judge handling a defamation lawsuit involving the couple said the evidence was more consistent with the theory that an intruder killed JonBenet.
Three years later, only months after Patsy Ramsey died, the case seemed to veer into absurdity when John Mark Karr, an American teacher in Thailand, offered a bizarre confession to the slaying.
He was whisked from to Colorado but was released after prosecutors concluded he couldn't have killed her, and once again there was no prime suspect.
Then, late last year, prosecutors turned over long underwear JonBenet was wearing to the Bode Technology Group near Washington, which looked for "touch DNA," or skin cells left behind where someone has touched something. The lab has only been using this technology for about three years.
The laboratory found previously undiscovered genetic material on the sides of the girl's long underwear, where an attacker would have grasped the clothing to pull it down, authorities said. The DNA matched the genetic material found earlier.
District Attorney Mary Lacy said the presence of the same male DNA in three places on the girl's clothing convinced investigators it belonged to JonBenet's killer and had not been left accidentally by an innocent party.
"It is therefore the position of the Boulder District Attorney's Office that this profile belongs to the perpetrator of the homicide," she said in a statement Wednesday. In a letter to the Ramseys, she said the DNA evidence "has vindicated your family."
Now investigators have DNA, if not a name.
Colorado Bureau of Investigation spokesman Lance Clem said Colorado's own database has 86,662 DNA profiles, all of which are entered in the national database.
The Colorado profiles include sex offenders dating back at least 20 years, plus any felon from the past three years in the Department of Corrections system, Clem said.
While Colorado's DNA database is updated continuously, the national database is updated several times a week, Clem said. The numbers are still small compared to the more than 55 million entries in the FBI's fingerprint database.
"I think it's simply a matter now of waiting for that day when they get a hit on the DNA and the person who brutally murdered this child is brought to justice," Wood said.
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 1150
victims cryPosted:
Thu Jul 10, 2008 6:57 am
I have a horrid feeling that it was someone in the neighborhood that night, a friend at an xmas party, if not a pillar of the community then a relative or bf of one.
Like Westerfield. Someone who would have no brushes with the law, and probably never will. Boulder should go back over its lists of everyone who was lived in and was staying with family that christmas, on the street and at parties.
course thats a vast amount of manpower for a cold case
On Vacation!
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 9307
yankee-in-francePosted:
Thu Jul 10, 2008 7:02 am
-- but why, Jon Benet, and how did he get into the house?
YIF
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 7001
Location: France
SavannahStarPosted:
Thu Jul 10, 2008 7:10 am
yankee-in-france wrote:
-- but why, Jon Benet, and how did he get into the house?
On one of the shows last night they mentioned the sheer size and complexity of that home.....it had something like 104 windows....and a number of ways that an intruder could have possibly got in.
Ooops, forgot....as to "why JonBenet"?.....well she was a very pretty little girl. Why is ANYONE the target of a murder?
**SuperStar**
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 21294
Location: Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil
All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3Next
Page 2 of 3
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
I never thought they were guilty and was disgusted with the way the media treated them.
