forumsforjustice.org a direct reply to cynic, 18 years if you want to see justice done

View previous topic View next topic Go down

forumsforjustice.org a direct reply to cynic, 18 years if you want to see justice done

Post by redpill on Wed Mar 18, 2015 10:34 pm

18 years later...
Started by cynic, December 23, 2014, 7:38 pm Tue Dec 23 19:38:00 UTC 2014

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?10341-18-years-later
cynic wrote:
18 years.
The smoke and mirrors, the unprecedented evasiveness, the legal dream team, the powerful connections – it all paid off. 18 years later, John and Burke walk around without a care in the world, JonBenet - long forgotten.
Had there been a genuine motivation for finding the truth, there are those who have shown how it’s done. It’s not that hard - instinctive, really.

cynic, lets get something clear.
if the forensic scientists at the FBI and Colorado Bureau of Investigations, created a science based forensic report coming to the conclusion, which they shared with both LE and BPD that

mark beckner wrote:
• "The suspect is the donator of that unknown DNA, and until you can prove otherwise, I think that's the way you've got to look at it."

which is eseentialy what Mary Lacy said in her letter

it is clear the forensic scientists created a science based forensic report, using science, coming to this conclusion.


mark beckner wrote:
• "The suspect is the donator of that unknown DNA, and until you can prove otherwise, I think that's the way you've got to look at it."

how can you say that there has been some injustice?

you are aware that FBI and  Colorado Bureau of Investigations both employ forensic scientists whose job it is to create and reconstruct a crime scene using science and scientific evidence like dna, fiber, shoe prints, handwriting etc?

and cynic, fyi, forensic handwriting mostly strongly disfavored Patsy as the author based on handwriting, and linguistics eliminated her.

so cynic and your rdi thugs, if the forensic scientists at FBI and  Colorado Bureau of Investigations using science conclude

mark beckner wrote:
• "The suspect is the donator of that unknown DNA, and until you can prove otherwise, I think that's the way you've got to look at it."


cynic wrote:
18 years.
The smoke and mirrors, the unprecedented evasiveness, the legal dream team, the powerful connections – it all paid off. 18 years later, John and Burke walk around without a care in the world, JonBenet - long forgotten.
Had there been a genuine motivation for finding the truth, there are those who have shown how it’s done. It’s not that hard - instinctive, really.

if these forensic scientists created a report a forensic report that both Mark Beckner and Mary Lacy reference that states

mark beckner wrote:
• "The suspect is the donator of that unknown DNA, and until you can prove otherwise, I think that's the way you've got to look at it."

in what way are they, LE, BPD, DA's office, Stan Garnett Mary Lacy, using smoke and mirrors, powerful connections that all paid off, and there was no genuine motivation?

cynic, are you aware that amazon, youtube and wikipedia have resources on forensic science, crime scene reconstruction?

this is one example on youtube


one way in which forensic science reconstructs crime scenes based on forensic evidence is blood spatter patterns



cynic there is a place on the internet that offers resources amazon, where books like

Crime Reconstruction, Second Edition
Jul 13, 2011
by W. Jerry Chisum and Brent E. Turvey

Crime Scene Investigation and Reconstruction (3rd Edition)
Jan 14, 2011
by Robert R. Ogle Jr.

and wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_reconstruction
wiki wrote:
Crime reconstruction or crime scene reconstruction is the forensic science discipline in which one gains "explicit knowledge of the series of events that surround the commission of a crime using deductive and inductive reasoning, physical evidence, scientific methods, and their interrelationships."[1] Gardner and Bevel explain that crime scene reconstruction "involves evaluating the context of a scene and the physical evidence found there in an effort to identify what occurred and in what order it occurred."[2] Chisum and Turvey explain that "[h]olistic crime reconstruction is the development of actions and circumstances based on the system of evidence discovered and examined in relation to a particular crime. In this philosophy, all elements of evidence that come to light in a given case are treated as interdependent; the significance of each piece, each action, and each event falls and rises on the backs of the others."[3]

Contents

   1 Methods
   2 Expertise
   3 Professional Associations
   4 Certification
   5 See also
   6 References
   7 External links

Methods

Crime scene reconstruction has been described as putting together a jigsaw puzzle but doing so without access to the box top; the analyst does not know what the picture is supposed to look like. Furthermore, not all of the pieces are likely to be present, so there will be holes in the picture. However, if enough pieces of a puzzle are assembled in the correct order, the picture may become clear enough that the viewer is able to recognize the image and answer critical questions about it.

In forensic science, there are three areas of importance in finding the answers and determining the components of a crime scene: (1) specific incident reconstruction, (2) event reconstruction, and (3) physical evidence reconstruction. Specific incident reconstruction deals with road traffic accidents, bombings, homicides, and accidents of any severity. Event reconstruction looks at connections between evidence, sequence of events, and identity of those involved. Physical evidence reconstruction focuses on such items as firearms, blood traces, glass fragments, and any other objects that can be stripped for DNA analysis.
Expertise

To be competent as a crime scene reconstructionist, one must possess the requisite technical knowledge and have a thorough understanding of forensic investigations. There are no set educational requirements; however, many practicing crime scene reconstructionists possess undergraduate or graduate degrees in forensic science, chemistry, biology, physics, engineering, or criminal justice. In addition, a crime scene reconstructionist must have considerable experience in the investigation and analysis of crime scenes and physical evidence. Most crime scene reconstructionists have gained such experience either as a crime scene investigator, homicide investigator, or medicolegal death investigator.

Arguably, a crime scene reconstructionist is a forensic scientist who specializes in interpreting and assembling evidence in a coherent manner. Chisum and Turvey explain that to perform crime reconstruction one need not "be an expert in all forensic disciplines" but "must become an expert in only one: the interpretation of the evidence in context."[4] The crime scene reconstructionist may not be the person who carries out laboratory analysis of evidence such as developing DNA profiles or performing firearms and toolmark analysis; however, the competent crime scene reconstructionist must understand the meaning of each various piece of evidence and how it fits within the overall context of the scene. In this way, the crime scene reconstructionist is able to assemble the necessary puzzle pieces to make the picture visible.
Professional Associations

The Association for Crime Scene Reconstruction was formed in 1991 by a group of crime scene professionals who "saw a need for an organization that would encompass an understanding of the whole crime scene and the necessity of reconstructing that scene in order to better understand the elements of the crime and to recognize and preserve evidence."[5] The association publishes a peer-reviewed journal and holds an annual conference in which members gain information about the latest techniques and technologies used in crime scene reconstruction and share case examples. Many crime scene reconstructionists are also members of the International Association of Bloodstain Pattern Analysts, the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, and the International Association for Identification or one of its state chapters.
Certification

The International Association for Identification (IAI) offers the only nationally-recognized Certified Crime Scene Reconstructionist program in the United States. To be eligible for certification, applicants must have a minimum of five years experience in the crime scene reconstruction field; must have completed a minimum of 120 hours of related professional training including coursework in bloodstain pattern analysis, shooting incident reconstruction, and other related areas; and, must meet other qualifications such as being published in a professional journal, presenting to a professional association, or being an active instructor in the field. Once approved by the board, applicants must pass a 300-question multiple choice examination and a series of practical questions involving actual analysis of crime scene evidence as presented in photographs.[6] Certification is valid for five years. The IAI maintains a roster of certified crime scene reconstructionists on the organization's website.[7]

forensic scientists use trace evidence

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trace_evidence

Trace evidence is created when objects contact. Material is often transferred by heat or induced by contact friction.

The importance of trace evidence in criminal investigations was shown by Dr. Edmond Locard in the early 20th Century. Since then, forensic scientists use trace evidence to reconstruct crimes, and to describe the people, places and things involved in them. Studies of homicides published in the forensic science literature show how trace evidence is used to solve crimes. Trace evidence is important in accident investigation, where movement of one part against another will often leave a tell-tale mark. Such analysis is of great use in forensic engineering.

Contents

   1 Examples
   2 Protection
   3 Analysis
   4 Problems
   5 See also
   6 References
   7 External links

Examples

Examples of typical trace evidence in criminal cases include glove prints, hairs, cosmetics, Lipsticks,[1] plant fibers, mineral fibers, synthetic fibers, glass, paint chips, soils, footprints, botanical materials, gunshot residue, explosives residue, and volatile hydrocarbons (arson evidence). For such evidence to be useful, it must be compared to similar items from suspects, but particular care is necessary to ensure a thorough analysis.
Skid mark from faulty ladder.

Ladder feet often leave a trace pattern on the ground, so showing how the ladder moved and caused an accident to the user. Skid marks from tires are often critical in determining the sequence of events before and during a car crash. Vehicular accident reconstruction relies on such marks to estimate vehicle speed before and during an accident, as well as braking and impact forces. Fabric prints of clothing worn by pedestrians in the paint and/or road grime of the striking vehicle can match a specific vehicle involved in a hit-and-run collision. Such traces are also known as "witness marks", especially in engineering and may be critical in understanding how a product failed. A typical witness mark could be an impact depression which broke a product, especially if that mark can be matched to the product which made the impact such as a hammer or nail. Such marks are also commonly encountered in criminal cases, and include bite marks, puncture marks, bullet holes etc.
Protection

The first preservation is to photograph in situ, and then remove the objects showing key traces, protect them, and analyse under controlled laboratory conditions.

Many techniques are used in the protection of trace evidence from criminal investigations, although all must be photographed as soon as possible, and while still in place. Samples may be collected by shaking, brushing, taping, vacuuming, swabbing and hand picking. Great care may be needed to prevent contamination with other substances (such as natural oil and sweat on the hand of the collector). In some cases, such as with oil or grease, a solvent extraction can be used to collect the evidence for analysis. The method used for collection is generally dependent on both the type of evidence and from where or what sort of object it is being collected.

Trace Evidence is also found in much smaller amounts at crime scenes.
Analysis
Close-up of broken fuel pipe using optical microscopy
Droplets of human blood. The droplets are round and show no splattering, indicating they impacted relatively slowly, in this case from a height of two feet.

Analysis of trace materials most often begins with a visual examination of the evidence usually involving macrophotography. This is then usually followed by microscopic analysis, of which a number of different types are available depending on the type of material to be analysed, such as a stereomicroscope, scanning electron microscope (SEM) or comparison microscope. SEM is especially useful because X-ray analysis can be conducted on selected areas of the sample, so is a form of microanalysis. It is useful where chemical residues can show unusual elements present which may indicate chemical attack of the product. A car accident caused by a diesel fuel leak, for example, showed traces of sulfur on the cracked tube indicative of attack by sulfuric acid from the battery.

Gunshot residue may be identified by elemental analysis using atomic absorption or with a scanning electron microscope equipped with an energy dispersive spectroscope. Small amounts of explosives, volatile hydrocarbons, and other chemicals are identified with the use of analytical instruments, such as gas chromatography, mass spectrometry, and infrared spectroscopy, all of which separate out the components of the chemicals.

Similar comments apply to damaged items from an accident scene, but care is needed in ensuring that the sample is not damaged by the testing, or sampling for testing. Such nondestructive testing must always be used first before considering destructive methods which involve taking small samples from the item for more detailed tests, such as spectroscopic analysis. Use of all such methods must be done in consultation with other experts and the relevant authorities, such as lawyers on both sides of a case.
Problems

False positives and contamination by subsequent handling or nearby objects (e.g. mixing of blood from victim and attacker), for example, are problems owing to the presence of many common substances and the necessity of human involvement in the collection of trace evidence. Both can occur with DNA traces and fingerprints. Partial fingerprints are even more vulnerable to false positives. Samples from accidents or crimes should therefore be protected as much as possible by enclosure in a sealable container as soon as possible, after an incident is under investigation.[2][3]

cynic in addition to DNA they found multiple types of unsourced fiber animal hair, tape ligature are unsourced, shoe print

so if these highly trained crime scene reconstructionists, using the trace evidence they found and the science of crime scene reconstruction conclude


mark beckner wrote:
• "The suspect is the donator of that unknown DNA, and until you can prove otherwise, I think that's the way you've got to look at it."

which Mary Lacy references, what is the basis for saying there is some dereliction of duty? if anyone is derelict it is forumsforjustice and your rdi pals.

if you really want john or burke prosecuted, why not attempt to identify this unknown dna?

and cynic, how is the conclusion both by mary lacy and mark beckner

mark beckner wrote:
• "The suspect is the donator of that unknown DNA, and until you can prove otherwise, I think that's the way you've got to look at it."

by CBI any different than what was the case for another colorado murder victim 18 years or so allie berelez

As advancements in technology emerged, evidence gathered in the case has been re-submitted for additional testing and comparison, police said. On Feb. 8, 2011, several items of evidence were submitted to the CBI for new DNA testing. A CBI agent developed a complete DNA profile from an area of Alie’s underwear and from the waistband of her underwear. That DNA profile matched the DNA profile of Stofer. "We had to wait 18 years for forensic science to catch up to the evidence we had on hand," said Englewood police Chief John Collins, announcing the end to the Berrelez case on Tuesday. "It was unequivocally his DNA in her underwear and it had no business being there."

what would be a scientific way to say that the tDNA found on ALlie berrelez is probabitve but the tDNA found on Jonbenet in 3 different locations + all trace evidence unsourced found on Jonbenet, is somehow the result of as you say powerful connections and corruption?

why not provide LE with suggestions on whose dna to test if that dna on jonbenet is "innocent"?

_________________
If you only knew the POWER of the Daubert side
avatar
redpill

Posts : 1605
Join date : 2012-12-08

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum