- Crime Scene Drawings
- Evidence
- DNA UM1 Profile
- CoraFiles
- Horita's DNA/Bode Notes
- Drive-Stun Wounds
- FGG Policy
- Morrissey w/Silverman
- Dougherty w/Silverman
- Victim Rights Act
- Victim Shoes
- Ransom Note
- Autopsy Report
- Thomas Deposition
- JBRCE Timeline
- 911 Call
- Acronyms
- Body
- Body - Internal
- Body - Head
- Body - Neck
- Book List
- Burke Did It?
- Clothing
- Cords
- Cover Up?
- DNA/Blood
- Duct Tape
- Evidence Interpretation
- Fibers
- Foreign Faction
- Friends
- Intruder
- Intruder - Sex Offender
- Intruder - Sexual Predator
- Intruder - Aquaintance
- John Mark Karr
- Neighbors
- Patsy & John Killers?
- Patsy
- Pineapple
- Prior Abuse?
- Ransom Note
- RN Comparisons
- RN Interpretations
- RN Movie Comparisons
- RN Who Wrote It?
- Staging
- Stun Gun
- Worked for Ramseys
- Who is Who in the Case?
- pdf Library
Coloado Open Records ActAndy Horita's DNA/Bode Notes
Special Thanks to my friend Samarkandy for making the CORA Request, December 14, 2016
Nov 01, 2007 - October 9, 2008 Horita's Multi-Entry DNA Memo
Andy Horita’s Notes are a professional investigative narrative of District Attorney Lacy’s DNA project with Bode Labs. It is hardly a complete set of documents, evident because it also identifies areas of interest where other info in the Case File is missing. For example, the PowerPoint Presentation to Forensic Scientists, Angela Williamson PhD and Amy Jeangunat Lab Analyst. Additionally, answers to questions formulated in anticipation of traveling to the Bode Technology Laboratory in Lorton, Virginia, are not provided. However, the memo is nonetheless very informative.
Especially interesting is what can be learned about the UM1 profile in CODIS from Horita's Notes. Presented with a Denver Police Department Chart of UM1, developed by Dr. Greg LaBerge, when asked,
"was a third party contained in the panties mixture"?Jeanguenat stated that she saw no indication that a third party contributed to the mixture and would "testify in court" to that effect.
Horita also enquired of a crime analyst at Denver Police Department to learn the protocols of 1997 Forensic DNA Testing in 1997; some testing back then was destructive, but they said, "they tested for DNA when presumptive tests indicated a body fluid with likely DNA, like saliva; they did not use a test then that would prohibit DNA testing years later. Later in the process,
Williamson gave her professional opinion again in that the serological sample “was probably saliva”.
The news of a preliminary DNA match on 3/24/2008 must have made shockwaves at the Justice Center. Can you imagine being at work that day and hearing the news? How exciting, a scientific breakthrough! And, say what you will about Mary Lacy; but she advanced the DNA in the JonBenet Ramsey Case when Boulder Police Department would not have anything to do with it. The Table below is 100% taken from the 3/24/2008 Bode Report.
Table of Facts supplied in Bode Lab Report 3/24/2008
Mar 24, 2008 - Bode Forensic Case Report
3/25/08 I received via FedEx envelope containing the Bode Teclmology case file relating to the testing of the "White long underwear bottoms. BPD020TET, CBI #6," identified by Bode as item 2S07-101-05. Four samples were collected from this item and individually identified by appending a letter (from A-D) to the end of their sample number. The samples were taken from the (A) exterior top right half of longjohns, (B) exterior top left half oflong johns, (C) interior top right half of long johns, (D) interior top left half of long johns.
The report indicates that DNA analysis of the exterior top right and left portions of the long johns reveal the presence of a mixture that includes the victim and one or more male contributors. Notably, the profile developed by the Denver PD, and previously uploaded to the CODIS database as a forensic unknown profile and the profiles developed from the exterior top right and left portions of the long johns were consistent. Therefore, the male contributor to the CODIS profile could not be excluded from having contributed to the mixture developed from these samples.
3/27/08 at approximately 0845 hours, I spoke to Williamson about the laboratory report I received on 3/25/08. It was her opinion that the serological source of the profile developed from the two samples that matched the CODIS profile was probably not a fluid, but the result of touch contact with those areas of the item.
When asked about the possibility of testing for the male contributor's racial background, Williamson noted that due to the fact that the profile obtained was a mixture it may not be possible to perform such a test. I then asked Williamson about the history of "touch DNA" testing. She stated that she introduced the technique to the Bode laboratory in July of 2007. Prior to that, she had used it successfully in Australia. She noted that in a particular case involving a "serial groper" she was able to develop the suspect's profile from touch DNA analysis of the victims' clothing. The success of the technique depends on how long the contact was made and how much DNA the depositor sheds. She explained that the touch DNA technique involves shaving the outer surface of a substrate (such as clothing), rather than cutting out a sample of the material. With the cutting method, the wearer of the clothing's DNA proftle often overwhelms or masks the profile of the touch depositor.
Williamson suggested that a database search be conducted to compare the unknown male profile to deceased victims of homicides or suspicious suicides. She noted that such searches have resulted in database matches in Baltimore, Maryland.
4/9/08 at approximately 1112 hours, I spoke with Bode Technology Casework analyst Amy Jeanguenat regarding submitting additional items of evidence for DNA testing. It was agreed that the hem area of the Barbie nightgown, found near the victim's body, could be tested for touch DNA. On 4/9/08, at approximately 1148 hours, I requested the Barbie nightgown from Boulder PD Det. Sgt. Tom Trujillo. This item was previously identified as BPD item number 12KKY, and CBI number 17.
4/17/08 at approximately 1358 hours, I received Boulder PD evidence item 12KKY, the Barbie nightgown, in a sealed, intact evidence bag, from BPD Property and Evidence Teclmician Lucy Batton. The evidence item was then placed into a clean, unused, Fed.Ex Pak and shipped via FedEx Priority Overnight to the Evidence Department of Bode Technology in Lorton, Virginia. Also included in the package was the 2-page Case Submission form and color photographs of the front and back of the evidence item that were taken by the CBI after cuttings from the item were taken and analylized by that lab approximately 10 years prior.
May 12, 2008 - Bode Forensic Case Report
5/15/08 I received the case report and invoice from Bode Technology regarding the testing of the Barbie nightgown (BPD evidence item 12KKY).
Jun 20, 2008 - Bode Forensic Case Report
5/21/08 at approximately 0933hours, I spoke with Williamson about the serological source of the touch DNA profile she developed from the exterior right and left sides of the white long johns worn by the victim. She stated that the scraping technique she used avoided any area of staining. She did not attempt to determine the serological source of the samples, but did not believe that the source was saliva. Williamson did not believe that the DNA profiles from the exterior right and left portions of the victim's long johns and the profile from the inside of the crotch of the underwear were both deposited via contamination from the autopsy table. She noted that she believed the serological source of the DNA profile developed from the underwear was "probably saliva.
Jan 08 - Mar 24, 2008 - DNA Peak Diagrams
Electropherogram JBR longJohns Right Exterior Waistband - Evidence of an Intruder
