daubert standard DNA and RDI claims DNA is a "red herring"

Judge Blocks Defense DNA Evidence

Nov. 9, 2015 - A proposed witness for the defendant in the Los Angeles Grim Sleeper case is not qualified to testify as an expert, a judge has ruled. Superior Court Judge Kathleen Kennedy said the testimony of a so-called DNA expert could not be used at the upcoming trial of Lonnie Franklin Jr.

Lawrence Sowers was prepared to testify that some of the DNA found at the crime scenes of victims attributed to Franklin belonged to convicted serial killer Chester Turner instead.

Judge Kennedy ruled that Sowers "woefully failed to meet the generally accepted methods of the scientific community in the area of forensic DNA analysis."

During a week-long evidentiary hearing, Sowers buckled under fierce cross-examination by Deputy District Attorney Marguerite Rizzo, who challenged him on his education, his calculations, and errors in his findings.

When Sowers began to change his finding during the hearing, Franklin's defense attorney Seymour Amster asked the judge to postpone the hearing.

"I do not feel comfortable," Amster told the judge, "representing Mr. Franklin at this moment with Dr. Sowers on this case."

An obviously frustrated Judge Kennedy denied the request.

"I’m not suspending this proceeding," Kennedy said. "We have been in progress on it for days and days and days and days and days and we’re going to finish it."

Franklin is scheduled to go on trial Dec. 15 on 11 counts of murder and other charges.
Franklin Questions DNA Evidence

May 1, 2015 - An attorney for the accused serial killer known as the "Grim Sleeper" believes DNA evidence in the cases of two women his client is suspected of killing belongs to another serial killer already on death row.

Seymour Amster, attorney for Lonnie Franklin Jr., told the court that an expert hired by the defense connected DNA from two of the cases to Chester Turner, who was convicted of killing 14 women in the Los Angeles area in the 1980s and 1990s.

At a pretrial hearing, Amster told the judge that the defense's case will revolve around the DNA evidence. He said his expert's finding will produce "lingering doubt" in the minds of the jurors.

Prosecutor Beth Silverman called the defense DNA findings "outlandish." She said Turner's DNA has been in the system for years and if any of the DNA evidence in the Franklin case was Turner's it would have produced a match a long time ago.

"This guy's taking it [the DNA] and doing his own abracadabra," Silverman told reporters, "and coming up with a conclusion that is outrageous."

The defense had requested DNA profiles of everyone who committed a violent felony during the 1980s and 1990s. Judge Kathleen Kennedy denied the motion, calling it a "fishing expedition."

Lawrence Sowers was prepared to testify that some of the DNA found at the crime scenes of victims attributed to Franklin belonged to convicted serial killer Chester Turner instead.

Judge Kennedy ruled that Sowers "woefully failed to meet the generally accepted methods of the scientific community in the area of forensic DNA analysis."

During a week-long evidentiary hearing, Sowers buckled under fierce cross-examination by Deputy District Attorney Marguerite Rizzo, who challenged him on his education, his calculations, and errors in his findings.

DA: DNA expert discredited at Denver trial; forensic scientist Richard ...

https://www.thedenverchannel.com/.../dna-expert-richard-eikelenboom-admi...
Sep 1, 2016
However, Richard Eikelenboom disputes that claim. ... "I appreciate Judge Whitney recognizing that Mr ...

Seems like you’re approaching the comparison of these two crimes based on victimology, whereas u/sithlord2016 is approaching it from a different perspective - that of modern crime-solving Techniques. I don’t recall accusing you of anything but if you think that, I’m sorry.

I don’t consider you a bully. No one tried to shut you down, but out of the gate I thought you were trying to shut him down instead of having a reasonable conversation. I’m not much into punishing people. I’m sorry you guys couldn’t manage the talk. Who knows if he will come back?

red-ducati via /r/JonBenet sent 2 days ago
The sharon wills case was 27th of December and Jonbenet was 25th of December. There is no connections of dates with mr cruels crimes in Australia so your theory is very random

red-ducati via /r/JonBenet sent 2 days ago

Ok I can see that Im coming across as being difficult so I will no longer comment on your mr cruel comments. If I have anything positive to contribute I will but I will no longer point out differences. For the record I did once consider if Mr Cruel could be involved.

I have followed this sub and the other sub for some time now. I have held back on my opinion and my theory as I was still undecided and there was a lot of information to process. I admit I only knew of the basics of this case until I started to look in to it more and the posts on this sub have been very informative. With that said I have a few questions that I would love anyone who believes IDI to answer for me:

If the purpose of the RN was to misdirect the police then why would an intruder want to misdirect the police by having them look outside the home? If an intruder was able to break in undedicated and with no evidence of a break in, then why try to make the police look in your direction? Wouldn’t it put the focus on the parents more if you just left the body in the home the way it was?

Why would an intruder write this long ass ransom note with a pen and paper from the home? Why would he put it back neatly in its place? How could he see what he was writing in the dark? Alternatively for those who believe he hid in the home and wrote the RN while waiting what exactly was his purpose to do this? Just to mess with them? And again why would he neatly put the pen and paper back in its spot? Wouldn’t you want to leave no evidence of yourself in the home? Isn’t it incredibly risky to leave pages of your handwriting in the home?

How did the intruder know that there was no alarm system? Or a huge dog? Or that the Ramsey’s could have had guests staying with them? How could the intruder know that the Ramseys weren’t going to have family staying with them which would mean more people around, the potential for someone to wake up and catch you, or someone who is a night owl and planned on staying up all night in the living room watching tv?

How did he navigate in this huge maze of a home in the dark?

How did he get JonBenet out of her bed without her waking up and screaming? The stun gun theory has so many flaws. What if it didn’t work? What if she was able to scream before being subdued? What if she was sleeping with her parents or her brother that night? It was Christmas. It seems like the worst day ever for an intruder to break in because of the potential for guests in the home and there is a higher chance of the Ramsey’s letting their children sleep with them because of the holiday.

Why would the intruder want to attack her or sexually violate her in the home? Wouldn’t he want to immediately gtfo so he can do whatever he wanted to without the chance of being caught?

Did the intruder have a car? He must have. Where did he park? Wouldn’t he be worried that a neighbor would see him?

So here is my theory: I believe there was incest going on in the home. I recently read a post on here that was a transcript of an investigator. If someone could point me in the direction of that post again I’d appreciate it. This person mentioned something along the lines of how the family related to each other and pretty much said without saying that the family was engaged in incest relations with each other. I think there was some dark secrets in that home. Not sure if both parents were molesting JonBenet but I think John was at least. However I think what happened that night exists outside of the abuse. I think JonBenet and Burke came home and ate pineapple as a snack before bed. Everyone gets ready for bed after but then something happens. I think Patsy might have lost her cool and hit JonBenet in the head with the flashlight. I think Burke was in bed the entire time. The rest of the night the parents stage the crime scene in the basement. Patsy wrote the note. I think the plan was for John to eventually get rid of her body but then obviously was not able to do so. I think the parents fully expected to be arrested. They lawyered up and refused to talk because they were guilty. I would never speak to the police without a lawyer but if my child was savagely murdered in my own home I would be helping the police every step of the way to catch the intruder.

Some last points I want to make. How can anyone be IDI? The dna is a red herring. It’s most likely touch dna. I read that there were 5 profiles meaning 5 different people. So do IDIers think 5 pedophiles came through the basement window on Christmas night and without being caught murdered JonBenet in the basement? How did they know where the new bloomies were? How did they know where Burke’s knife was if it was hidden in a closet? Why did John try immediately flying out of Bolder 30 mins after finding his daughters body? Why was Burke not scared of anything after his sister was brutally murdered in his home? Could this be that Burke heard his parents up all night staging the crime scene? Why did the Ramsey’s not start freaking out when no phone call came in that morning? After they discovered the RN and called 911 why did they not search every room of their home? What if the intruder was still there? What if it was a sick joke and JonBenet was hiding somewhere? I know it’s highly unlikely but I think most people would be trying to think of anything besides the horrible fact that their daughter was gone. And why would they invite the friends over?? Why weren’t Patsy and John near each other that morning and clinging to each other? Why did Patsy not immediately run to John when he came up the stairs holding JonBenet(away from him I would like to add) Why did they send Burke to the Fernies? Wouldn’t be more safe in their home full of cops?

Honestly I could keep going on and on pointing out the Ramsey’s strange behavior but it’s almost too much to list. I honestly think anyone who is IDI at this point is either working on behalf of the Ramsey’s, haven’t looked at all the evidence or they have boughten in to the Ramsey PR machine. I tend to think that is the case with most IDI. They can’t imagine that this wealthy, perfect and Christian family could do such a thing. Please. Lots of horrible stuff goes on behind closed doors. They say weird things like “The Ramsey’s didn’t watch movies” Even though Patsy admitted to watching movies as a family in bed and John had movie posters in the basement. They try to explain away all the huge huge huge problems with their behavior and the lies they told. And the fact that it took them 4 months to sit down for an interview. The only reason the Ramsey’s aren’t in jail is because of their money. The DA didn’t want to press charges because it’s hard to prove exactly who killed her and who did what part of the staging. With the Ramsey’s lawyers they would have had an OJ situation on their hands.

I read a comment once by and IDIer that said they imagine they would have liked Patsy and they would have been good friends. I almost gagged. Patsy was not a good friend to her friends when she started to point the finger at them when her plans to cast suspicion on the help didn’t work. Unless if this poster who made that comment was a wealthy and privileged stay at home mom then I doubt Patsy would have been friends with them. Patsy was obsessed with her family image and how their family was presented to the world. More of a reason she was able to keep quiet about the truth of what happened that Christmas night. God forbid the secret got out about the incest and abuse in her “perfect family”