LAST EDITED ON Jan-29-04 AT 04:35 PM (EST)
 
And another previous post moved over:

I think the testing of the DNA is confusing.
We have the crime scene DNA (fingernails, panties). We have been led to believe it is degraded or contaminated in some way. The reason/s for this vague reference (degraded/contaminated) could be due to a number of possibilities - environmental factors, mishandling in collection, mishandling in the lab. The good news, however, is that the DNA has enough (10) of the (13) REQUIRED/SPECIFIED CODIS-required markers to check it against the databanks.

Most, if not all, of the suspects have had their DNA compared to the crime scene DNA. My guess is that for financial reasons, some of them may have been tested on a preliminary basis - starting with blood type - and may have been excluded from further comparison on that basis (maybe not). Most, if not all, were compared by way of kits that compare only 5 or 6 of the 13 specific CODIS-required markers. If NONE of those match, exclusion. If 5 of the 6 do not match, exclusion. If 1 of the 6 do not match, exclusion. (On the other hand, if 5 of the 6 match, they can conclude they have the wrong man, but they might be on track for a genetic family relationship).

Say they get a match of all 5 or 6 markers from that kit's test/comparison (the 5 or 6 specific markers from the crime scene DNA match the same 5 or 6 specific markers from the suspect). Other kits would be used for that sample to see if ALL of the markers match. If the crime scene DNA gives only 10 very specific CODIS-eligible identifiers/markers and a suspect's DNA matches those same 10 very specific markers - Bingo! Step two is a mathematical calculation is done to establish the odds of that kind of match 'randomly' occurring (usually in the 1 in X (edited to) trillions range).

Convicted violent offenders' DNA entered into CODIS will be the full 13 CODIS-selected genetic markers (arrived at through fresh DNA collection). They are CSF1PO, FGA, TH01, TPOX, vWA, D3S1358, D5S818, D7S820, D8S1179, D13S317, D16S539, D18S51 and D21S11.

If the 10 Ramsey crime scene markers (10 of those 13 listed above) match a suspect or a felon in the database, you have a HIT.

Over the course of 7 years, DNA testing has improved, particularly with smaller samples and degraded and mixed samples. Who knows what tests have been conducted and what 'refined' methods have been applied in the Ramsey case. We are given the impression the BPD did not keep up with the evolving DNA testing improvements and left the crime scene samples basically sitting on a shelf. We realy don't know exactly what they have or have not done. There has been much confusion in the Reporting of the DNA information perhaps due to the Reporter not being clear on its meaning and having difficulty with Intepretation. Too many unsourced statements and too many out of context statements have been circulated IMO.

Another problem may have been that the crime scene DNA profile simply did not get entered into the state databanks due to some reason that deemed the profile 'unsuitable' and no one cared enough to carry the ball and ensure its value was refined and redefined. JMO!

I hope some day we find out the details that will explain this long delay.