project Tricia Griffith rebuttal: no evidence intruder Jonbenet Ramsey

this is trasha griffith


trasha pictured below is an example of an anti-science denialist



this is what she claims

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?76520-Patsy-Ramsey/page92

tricia griffith wrote:
Anti-K, this whole forum has example after example after example that an intruder did not commit this crime.

No one can show one scintilla of evidence of an intruder.

As owner, I do my best to stay out of actual discussions about a crime.

The JBR case is the one expection.

Websleuths is a leader in true crime information as well as discussion. People come here to get information. It is imperative we deal with the facts. Not fantasy.

All I ask for are facts and a logical connecting of the dots. Logic and facts.

When I get time I will be going through the forum to make sure the JonBenet Ramsey forum is being held up to the high standards just like all our other forums on Websleuths.

The days of allowing anyone to post anything because it's part of their "theory" are gone. Facts and logic. Very simple.

this is her qualifications

Host Tricia Griffith is a veteran radio disc jockey and owner of Websleuths.com and owner of Forums for Justice.org.

in other words she has ZERO qualifications in forensic science. she has no training in forensic fiber, trace evidence, DNA yet she claims

tricia griffith wrote:
Anti-K, this whole forum has example after example after example that an intruder did not commit this crime.

No one can show one scintilla of evidence of an intruder.

i promise you Tricia has never studied nor read books similar to this



Trace Evidence (Essentials of Forensic Science) Hardcover – April 1, 2009



this is a murder victim







(one in the middle)

she was found dead, obviously a victim of a homicide

they only found 2 pieces of forensic evidence

1-  a single strand of dyed-blond hair



and

2 a black scarf at the bottom of a riverbed. they fished the scarf out of the river, they tested that scarf for touch DNA, they found touch DNA that was male and did not match the victim

this touch DNA did not match any known offender on a criminal database.



so the question is, are these 2 items found at the crime scene represent a scintilla of forensic evidence linking the murder victim to her killer?

after all, the dyed hair could come from a friend, or innocently transferred.

the tDNA found on the scarf could come from manufacture, from a friend, from secondary DNA transfer.

so are these 2 exhibits a scintilla of forensic evidence? there are many possible explanations why a dyed hair could be found on her clothing, and tDNA found on her scarf. this tDNA did not match any profile on the criminal offender database.

if your answer is yes it is evidence, then what standard is there to say yes, this is evidence but not the evidence listed for an intruder in the Jonbenet Ramsey murder.

if your answer is no, this is not a scintilla of evidence, you're wrong, you're ignorant and have no business commenting on the significance of the trace evidence of Jonbenet Ramsey case, not on websleuth, not on forumsforjustice.