New DNA clears Ramsey family »
Posted By coreyspring 3 months ago in NewsNewly discovered DNA evidence in the JonBenet Ramsey murder case does not match any Ramsey family members or anyone in law enforcement DNA databases.
Read Full Story at 9news.com »
Submitted By:
coreyspring
I hang out a lot in the TV area, some of my favorite shows are, in no particular order: The Office, My Name is Earl ...
Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 21
-
-
-
0%
DropkickaLib3 months ago
I think he means that the stress probably didn't help her ability to recover from a bout with cancer.
Reply
-
-
0%
DropkickaLib3 months ago
It reminds me of the Sam Sheppard Case, the case that inspired "the Fugitive" TV series. They found out years later, from DNA evidence I believe, that a handyman killed his wife. The bad publicity ruined his medical practice and his life and he died before being phorensically exonerated.
Reply -
0%
jordan113 months ago
The ability to 'discover' the evidence wasn't there when she was killed. This is new science, that allows DNA to be picked up from just a touch. They found DNA that doesn't belong to the family, but unfortunately, it doesn't match the DNA of anyone in the files of those in the justice system.
Reply
-
-
0%
TightBlueJeans3 months ago
It will be interesting to see just where the case goes from here with what they do have.
Reply -
0%
LovelyHoney3 months ago
I never believed that the Ramseys had anything to do with the murder. I still believe that someone was in the house when they came home. I've watched two documentaries about this murder (A&E and Discovery Channel). Their house was built like a "maze" and the children's bedrooms where on one floor and the parent's bedroom on the very top floor of the home. If someone was in their home they would've never known it. There were back staircases that led to the hallway of Jon Benet's bedroom that also led to the basement area where she was found.
So sad the way this family was hounded by both the press and law enforcement.
Reply -
0%
skeptic2713 months ago
This is unclear. First the article says the new DNA matches the old DNA and then it says it doesn't.
"Those new DNA 'touch' samples from the leggings match the DNA that was found in 1997 on the panties of the child."
"The 1997, DNA contained enough information or DNA markers to be entered into the federal DNA database called CODIS."
"The new 'touch' DNA from JonBenet Ramsey has been compared with what exists in CODIS, but no match has been found."
If the new DNA clears the Ramseys and it matches the old DNA, then why didn't the old DNA clear the Ramseys?
Reply-
0%
Mdiar3 months ago
"The new DNA "touch" analysis technology was not available in 1996 when the child was killed."
If I had to hazard a guess, one of two things prevented that exact material from being used. The first, of course, could be that once the data is entered into the CODIS that the genetic sampling can't be used in the test that is used (bureaucratic reasons, probably if that's the case). The other, and probably more likely case is that the original sample did not contain enough genetic material to run this type of test on.
Reply
-
-
0%
Mutainia3 months ago
I was actually hoping the Ramseys were guilty, for their OWN sake. I mean, how tragic. To lose a daughter to some evil, horny, bastard, and, then for 12 years, having most of the world thinking YOU were the evil, incestuous, pervert who KILLED her. Ouch. That's pretty warped. Well, I wonder when DNA will prove OJ to be innocent, and that it was actually all caused by evil, racist, bastards using an inter-dimensional time-machine to just make it LOOK like OJ would do such incredible evil?
Reply -
0%
Howtogo3 months ago
How convenient the DNA shows up now. Where was it then? The Boulder Colorado Police Department should be the ones examined. Not for the murder, but for competence. Maybe their upper staff attended the local Towns University for their Investigative training. It would make sense then.
Reply -
0%
chevydog3 months ago
This event was a media spectacle for far too long. It's nice to finally see something show up as news that doesn't muddy the water more.
Reply -
0%
PsychoHosebeast3 months ago
I'd like to point out one thing that seems overlooked. This does NOT clear them from being involved. It simply clears them of leaving any DNA on their daughter. It means that someone else, a male, not related to her, was involved also.
The cops have moved like cold molasses on this case, doing their best to drag their feet at every turn. Bear witness to the fact that it took them eleven years to come up with this clue. Eleven years. Wolfie is definitely right in saying that it's unfortunate that this wasn't uncovered within Patsy Ramsey's lifetime (whether she had anything to do with it, or not), such police work is unacceptable even in a third world country.
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib3 months ago
Like in Portugal, who's police force seems unable to solve the Madeline McCann case or even find a single clue.
Reply -
0%
skeptic2712 months, 3 weeks ago
"I'd like to point out one thing that seems overlooked. This does NOT clear them from being involved. It simply clears them of leaving any DNA on their daughter. It means that someone else, a male, not related to her, was involved also."
That may be true, but in one report I heard about the death of JonBenet they said that she was garroted. For those of you who don't know that term, that's where the rope or cord around her neck is twisted by means of stick or something through the cord until the victim is strangled. The same report says that there isn't a single instance in the records of a parent doing that to their own child.
Reply
-
-
0%
saneman3 months ago
We have known this since 1997. The article states "The recent testing was done on a different area of the child's clothing and it matches previous DNA tested from the child's panties in 1997. It is DNA from a male."
This isn't new evidence of any kind regardless of the testing techniques. It only reinforces what was known in 1997. To wait nearly 12 years to remove the Ramseys from being suspects is nothing more than a crock of BS. This reinforces my thoughts about law enforcement.
Reply -
0%
abntv3 months ago
Only my opinion..
The police screwed this investigation up so bad from the first day I do not believe anything that comes out of this department. How in the world did they manage to come up with this new evidence after all this time??
Does not matter where it came from it is still "new" evidence in this case.
Reply-
birddog54Comment removed: User banned.
-
-
0%
THOMNH623 months ago
I wonder what Mark Ferman has to say about this new evidence. Not really sure of the spelling but you know who I mean.
Reply -
0%
Hobe2 months, 4 weeks ago
New DNA clears Ramsey family
Nothing new here, nothing changed...
This prosacutor is a real Nut case.
The ramsey's know more than what they are saying....
What a disgrace.. Connections and Money can buy anything...
Reply -
0%
Pricebreak2 months, 4 weeks ago
Many years later and STILL justice hasn't been served, I feel sorry for the family.
Reply
Add a Comment
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.