From Why_Nut: I observe the wording. The summary says that samples from 7 (the panties), 14L and 14M (the left and right hand nails) revealed a mixture (see the word "mix-" which leads to the off-screen completion "-ture"?). But look further. "IF the minor" component in the samples from 7, 14L and 14M "were contributed by a single" individual, then the Ramseys can be excluded. But we are all smart enough to fill in that particular blank. If the minor component in the samples from 7, 14L and 14M were contributed by more than a single individual, then the Ramseys are not excluded, not by this summary, in any case. If both John's and Patsy's DNA are under JonBenet's nails, they may well be included because neither individually has the same markers as all components of the sample, but together they may add up to the components found.

If the word “individual” (as you suggest) as well as the word “John” is cut off from that one location on the left side, then we are missing several words (down the left side). You also notice Patsy and Melinda are not listed. I would suggest that might be due to the fact that part of the report is missing. I would also suggest that they are not listed in the “summary notes” because the DNA that is not JonBenet’s is male.

From Why_Nut: We have letter combinations to reference now. For example, we can see that there are genetic locations referenced as BB and AA. If John has a marker of WA at location BB, but not a marker of WB at location AA, then he is excluded. But if John has a marker of WA at location BB, and Patsy has a marker of WB at location AA, then the sample may be a mixture of both their markers.

Or, perhaps, as we have been told quite often, the DNA does not match the Ramsey family members. Note the blacked out part after “JEFF RAMSEY”. What do you think that might be? Could it be someone else’s name? You’ll notice in the top half it lists the “Bloodstain Standard from John Andrew Ramsey”, but does not list anyone else (not John B. Ramsey, not Jeff Ramsey).