The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Mary Lacy letter and the CURRICULUM VITAE of a forensic DNA expert

Go down

Mary Lacy letter and the CURRICULUM VITAE of a forensic DNA expert Empty Mary Lacy letter and the CURRICULUM VITAE of a forensic DNA expert

Post by redpill Thu Sep 10, 2015 4:35 pm

The DA's office and the crime lab, the science and expert witness aspects of crime scene investigation, is bound by the Daubert Standard

under Daubert Standard, only an expert witness who meets the Daubert Standard may offer expert witness testimony as to the significance of scientific evidence.

Tricia Griffith is the owner of the largest most influential website for crime. she claims that the DNA + unsourced trace evidence does not prove intruder.

Mary Lacy letter and the CURRICULUM VITAE of a forensic DNA expert TriciaGriffith

this is her expertise

Contact me at: ........ Based on the wildly popular true crime forum ( and Forums for ( this radio show is unlike any other show you have heard before. Each week Tricia's True Crime Radio features several intriguing true crime cases. Host Tricia Griffith is a veteran radio disc jockey and owner of and owner of Forums for She brings her unique brand of broadcasting, knowledge and (at times) humor her Websleuths radio Websleuths radio, True Crime, Current Events, Always Discussed with Common Sense!!! The opinions expressed on Tricia's True Crime Radio are those of the hosts and guests re

in summary

Host Tricia Griffith is a veteran radio disc jockey

in otherwords she has ZERO scientific training in trace evidence criminalistics nor crime scene reconstruction nor forensic DNA. her opinion the DNA is not evidence of an intruder is not an expert witness testimony.

Mary Lacy letter references DNA experts

On March 24, 2008, Bode informed us that they had recovered and identified genetic material from both sides of the waist area of the long johns. The unknown male profile previously identified from the inside crotch area of the underwear matched the DNA recovered from the long johns at Bode.

We consulted with a DNA expert from a different laboratory, who recommended additional investigation into the remote possibility that the DNA might have come from sources at the autopsy when this clothing was removed. Additional samples were obtained and then analyzed by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation to assist us in this effort. We received those results on June 27th of this year and are, as a result, confidant that this DNA did not come from innocent sources at the autopsy. As mentioned above, extensive DNA testing had previously excluded people connected to the family and to the investigation as possible innocent sources.

I want to acknowledge my appreciation for the efforts of the Boulder Police Department, Bode Technology Group, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, and the Denver Police Department Forensic Laboratory for the great work and assistance they have contributed to this investigation.

the following is an example of the CV of a forensic DNA expert qualifications in forming expert witness testimony employed by Bode, BPD, CBI, DPFL, FBI, who not only found this DNA but them provided them testimony


Norah Rudin

View Norah's curriculum vitae.

Norah Rudin holds a B.A. from Pomona College and a Ph.D. from Brandeis University. She is a member of the California Association of Criminalists, the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, and a Diplomate of the American Board of Criminalistics. After completing a post-doctoral fellowship at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, she served three years as a full-time consultant/technical leader for the California Department of Justice DNA Laboratory and has also served as consulting technical leader for the Idaho Department of Law Enforcement DNA Laboratory, the San Francisco Crime Laboratory DNA Section, and the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department DNA Laboratory. Dr. Rudin has co-authored An Introduction to DNA Forensic Analysis and Principles and Practice of Criminalistics: The Profession of Forensic Science. She is also the author of the Dictionary of Modern Biology. Dr. Rudin has taught a variety of general forensic and forensic DNA courses for the University of California at Berkeley extension and on-line. She is frequently invited to speak at various legal symposia and forensic conferences, and recently served a guberatorial appointment to the Virginia Department of Forensic Science Scientific Advisory Committee. She is currently co-chair of the Constitution Project Committee on DNA Collection. She remains active as an independent consultant and expert witness in forensic DNA.

Dr. Rudin and Mr. Inman have formed the non-profit company SCIEG (Scientific Collaboration, Innovation, and Education) for the purpose of developing Lab Retriever, a software tool to perform likelihood ratios with a probability of drop-out, and more generally to further forensic science education in general.

Daubert requires expertise similar to stated above and access to the case file.

James Kolar is a detective. James Kolar is NOT an expert witness in forensic DNA. Mark Beckner is BPD officer. He is NOT an expert witness. NO RDI poster you have seen on any forum has any qualification in Forensic DNA.

Under Daubert, James Kolar's opinions or the opinions of any RDI forum poster from forumsforjustice to websleuth, on the significance of DNA has ZERO  value.

the forensic DNA experts write a forensic report detailing their findings. their conclusions are reflected in Mary Lacy letter

the conclusion of these DNA expert witness who were consulted is

The unexplained third party DNA on the clothing of the victim is very significant and powerful evidence. It is very unlikely that there would be an innocent explanation for DNA found at three different locations on two separate items of clothing worn by the victim at the time of her murder. This is particularly true in this case because the matching DNA profiles were found on genetic material from inside the crotch of the victim’s underwear and near the waist on both sides of her long johns, and because concerted efforts that might identify a source, and perhaps an innocent explanation, were unsuccessful.

It is therefore the position of the Boulder District Attorney’s Office that this profile belongs to the perpetrator of the homicide.

DNA is very often the most reliable forensic evidence we can hope to find during a criminal investigation. We rely on it often to bring to justice those who have committed crimes. It can likewise be reliable evidence upon which to remove people from suspicion in appropriate cases.

The Boulder District Attorney’s Office does not consider any member of the Ramsey family, including John, Patsy, or Burke Ramsey, as suspects in this case. We make this announcement now because we have recently obtained this new scientific evidence that adds significantly to the exculpatory value of the previous scientific evidence. We do so with full appreciation for the other evidence in this case.

that is DNA expert + trace evidence criminalist expert + ABDFE forensic handwriting and linguistic experts, all trending in one direction INTRUDER

the intruder theory is the only theory that is the conclusion of daubert standard expert witness testimony in multiple fiends of science who had primary access to the case file. RDI are simply incompetent

Stan Garnett reviewed the case file and said there is no evidence to charge the Ramseys.

If you only knew the POWER of the Daubert side

Posts : 6246
Join date : 2012-12-08

Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

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