41 year old murder solved - Page 2

proudlyfromNJ · ‎05-01-2010

@Pearlee wrote:
@Moretofollow wrote:
From what I've read they used familial dna to find the killer. What that means is the killer's dna was not in their database and so no match was ever found from evidence at the crime scene. But, through familial dna, law enforcement did get a match and what that means is a relative of the killer perhaps a son, got in trouble with the law and his dna was in the database. Law enforcement now had a name and a vital clue which they pursued to find out who the killer was.
@Lovingq It does not necessarily mean that. Oftentimes when someone has been a suspect but there's never been enough evidence against that person to convict, and the person has died (likely in a 41 yr old case), a relative of the suspect will voilunatrily gtive up DNA to solve the crime. It could be the way you state, but not necessarily at all.

Questions that followed the original post could have been avoided had the People link, which I read over the weekend, been posted. I am constantly advocating posting a link to document news stories for this very reason.

Well, I have an IPad and have no idea how to post a link. Please tell me how. Edited to say, I don't open links on this forum. But I don't mind posting them if I knew how.

Pearlee · ‎06-11-2011

@proudlyfromNJ wrote:
@Pearlee wrote:
@Moretofollow wrote:
From what I've read they used familial dna to find the killer. What that means is the killer's dna was not in their database and so no match was ever found from evidence at the crime scene. But, through familial dna, law enforcement did get a match and what that means is a relative of the killer perhaps a son, got in trouble with the law and his dna was in the database. Law enforcement now had a name and a vital clue which they pursued to find out who the killer was.
@Lovingq It does not necessarily mean that. Oftentimes when someone has been a suspect but there's never been enough evidence against that person to convict, and the person has died (likely in a 41 yr old case), a relative of the suspect will voilunatrily gtive up DNA to solve the crime. It could be the way you state, but not necessarily at all.

Questions that followed the original post could have been avoided had the People link, which I read over the weekend, been posted. I am constantly advocating posting a link to document news stories for this very reason.
Well, I have an IPad and have no idea how to post a link. Please tell me how. Edited to say, I don't open links on this forum. But I don't mind posting them if I knew how.

@proudlyfromNJ Well, proudlyfromNJ, if I owned an Ipad I'd tell you how but not everyone does and I don't.

Those who don't want to click on links don't need to. But many of us will click on links. I don't see the harm in posting them for those who do have questions/want documentation and are willing to open links. I do post links and it seems a lot of people do open them from what I've read as responses to my posts.

Preds · ‎12-17-2012

(LOS ANGELES, CA.) -- Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department investigators on Monday plan to announce at a news conference they've solved the 1976 murder of Karen Klaas, a Hermosa Beach, California mother of two and ex-wife of singer Bill Medley of The Righteous Brothers , one of the most popular rock acts of the 1960's.

Monday is the 41st anniversary of the murder.

A statement issued Friday by the department said investigators believe the case has been solved through the use of “familial DNA,” which identified the killer. The process involves detectives searching law enforcement databases to identify likely relatives of the suspect.

The 32-year old Klaas was found in her Hermosa Beach home on Jan. 30, 1976. She had been sexually assaulted, choked and left unconscious. She died in a hospital while in a coma a few days later.

A lead police developed in the case was a thick-haired, bearded man who was seen exiting Klaas’ front door when neighbors went to check on her. In 1976, detectives created a plaster model of the head and published it on a flier.

The suspect was white male, about 28 years old, around five-feet, nine-inches tall, medium build with brown hair and a beard.

Klaas was attacked just after returning home from taking her youngest child to a local pre-school. Police said the home showed signs of a struggle and had been ransacked.

Police have not said if an arrest has been made in the case or if the suspect is even alive after all these years.

Bill Medley told a California newspaper, the Orange County Register in 2000 that, “Karen was very loved and respected, and it was a horror what happened to her. She has a lot of friends who would like to see this resolved.”

From the Sky Valley Chronicle

Fate whispers to her, "You cannot withstand the storm." She whispers back, "I am the storm."

goldensrbest · ‎03-10-2010

@Pearlee wrote:
@Moretofollow wrote:
From what I've read they used familial dna to find the killer. What that means is the killer's dna was not in their database and so no match was ever found from evidence at the crime scene. But, through familial dna, law enforcement did get a match and what that means is a relative of the killer perhaps a son, got in trouble with the law and his dna was in the database. Law enforcement now had a name and a vital clue which they pursued to find out who the killer was.
@Lovingq It does not necessarily mean that. Oftentimes when someone has been a suspect but there's never been enough evidence against that person to convict, and the person has died (likely in a 41 yr old case), a relative of the suspect will voilunatrily gtive up DNA to solve the crime. It could be the way you state, but not necessarily at all.

Questions that followed the original post could have been avoided had the People link, which I read over the weekend, been posted. I am constantly advocating posting a link to document news stories for this very reason.

I do not know how to do that,and get tired of someone always saying that,i said it was from people,why can't people look it up?

When you lose some one you L~O~V~E, that Memory of them, becomes a TREASURE.

Sweet_Serenity · ‎01-22-2016

@goldensrbest wrote:
@Pearlee wrote:
@Moretofollow wrote:
From what I've read they used familial dna to find the killer. What that means is the killer's dna was not in their database and so no match was ever found from evidence at the crime scene. But, through familial dna, law enforcement did get a match and what that means is a relative of the killer perhaps a son, got in trouble with the law and his dna was in the database. Law enforcement now had a name and a vital clue which they pursued to find out who the killer was.
@Lovingq It does not necessarily mean that. Oftentimes when someone has been a suspect but there's never been enough evidence against that person to convict, and the person has died (likely in a 41 yr old case), a relative of the suspect will voilunatrily gtive up DNA to solve the crime. It could be the way you state, but not necessarily at all.

Questions that followed the original post could have been avoided had the People link, which I read over the weekend, been posted. I am constantly advocating posting a link to document news stories for this very reason.
I do not know how to do that,and get tired of someone always saying that,i said it was from people,why can't people look it up?

Exactly!! Simply Google. Thank you for sharing.🌷

itiswhatitis · ‎05-27-2016

@goldensrbest wrote:
It gives hope for other murders being solved.

That's right @goldensrbest. Thank goodness there is no statute of limitations on murder in our country!

*Call Tyrone*

itiswhatitis · ‎05-27-2016

@Pearlee wrote:
@Moretofollow wrote:
From what I've read they used familial dna to find the killer. What that means is the killer's dna was not in their database and so no match was ever found from evidence at the crime scene. But, through familial dna, law enforcement did get a match and what that means is a relative of the killer perhaps a son, got in trouble with the law and his dna was in the database. Law enforcement now had a name and a vital clue which they pursued to find out who the killer was.
@Lovingq It does not necessarily mean that. Oftentimes when someone has been a suspect but there's never been enough evidence against that person to convict, and the person has died (likely in a 41 yr old case), a relative of the suspect will voilunatrily gtive up DNA to solve the crime. It could be the way you state, but not necessarily at all.

Questions that followed the original post could have been avoided had the People link, which I read over the weekend, been posted. I am constantly advocating posting a link to document news stories for this very reason.

@Pearlee, I try to make it a habit of posting links, but some people don't like them for fear of catching viruses and such.

*Call Tyrone*

SunValley · ‎04-19-2010

Thank you for posting. I rarely click on links because some are imbedded in other sites that require log ins and agreeing to use or "likes" which I won't do. If the subject interests me I will Google it for information sources. I am glad that this cold case was pursued.

Pearlee · ‎06-11-2011

@itiswhatitis wrote:
@Pearlee wrote:
@Moretofollow wrote:
From what I've read they used familial dna to find the killer. What that means is the killer's dna was not in their database and so no match was ever found from evidence at the crime scene. But, through familial dna, law enforcement did get a match and what that means is a relative of the killer perhaps a son, got in trouble with the law and his dna was in the database. Law enforcement now had a name and a vital clue which they pursued to find out who the killer was.
@Lovingq It does not necessarily mean that. Oftentimes when someone has been a suspect but there's never been enough evidence against that person to convict, and the person has died (likely in a 41 yr old case), a relative of the suspect will voilunatrily gtive up DNA to solve the crime. It could be the way you state, but not necessarily at all.

Questions that followed the original post could have been avoided had the People link, which I read over the weekend, been posted. I am constantly advocating posting a link to document news stories for this very reason.
@Pearlee, I try to make it a habit of posting links, but some people don't like them for fear of catching viruses and such.

@itiswhatitis As I already posted here on this thread, that's fine; then those who don't want to open links certainly don't have to. But many are willing to - I know that because a lot of people comment on links that I post. At least give people the choice for more info if they have no problem opening links. I don't have a problem with it -- I have really good anti virus protection.

itiswhatitis · ‎05-27-2016

@Pearlee wrote:
@itiswhatitis wrote:
@Pearlee wrote:
@Moretofollow wrote:
From what I've read they used familial dna to find the killer. What that means is the killer's dna was not in their database and so no match was ever found from evidence at the crime scene. But, through familial dna, law enforcement did get a match and what that means is a relative of the killer perhaps a son, got in trouble with the law and his dna was in the database. Law enforcement now had a name and a vital clue which they pursued to find out who the killer was.
@Lovingq It does not necessarily mean that. Oftentimes when someone has been a suspect but there's never been enough evidence against that person to convict, and the person has died (likely in a 41 yr old case), a relative of the suspect will voilunatrily gtive up DNA to solve the crime. It could be the way you state, but not necessarily at all.

Questions that followed the original post could have been avoided had the People link, which I read over the weekend, been posted. I am constantly advocating posting a link to document news stories for this very reason.
@Pearlee, I try to make it a habit of posting links, but some people don't like them for fear of catching viruses and such.

@itiswhatitis As I already posted here on this thread, that's fine; then those who don't want to open links certainly don't have to. But many are willing to - I know that because a lot of people comment on links that I post. At least give people the choice for more info if they have no problem opening links. I don't have a problem with it -- I have really good anti virus protection.