if we do that and we can, then we ll have to live with it but to not do it is criminal and just negligent and lazy. martha: now a dna expert says she has access to cutting edge technology that could help solve this case quickly. if the dna found on jonbenet is viable how long could it take to catch her killer? it might only be a matter of hours before the dna contributor is identified. we have to put all the puzzle pieces back together little by little by little. what i m doing all day long is building the family trees of these individuals that are sharing dna with this unknown suspect. martha: her half brother is also asking colorado governor for help and asking him for access to case information from the boulder police department. nancy grace host of fox
lab. there are other labs that have more cutting edge technology that could be utilized. i don t see why we re not doing that. and i spoke to a dna expert regarding c.c. moore s claim that if you got the dna comparison you could get an answer within a couple of hours. that may or may not be accurate. to do that you have to have a known person to compare it to. this may be a matter of going all the way up 100 years and back down the family tree to find a perp if we get dna. under all the right circumstances she may be right. martha: would everybody love to hear how that one comes out after all these years. 30 seconds here. you have a fox nation special on chicago s crime crisis with our political analyst gianno
depression. we don t want a depression. bill: thanks. the dna if it s viable how long would it take to catch her killer? only a matter of hours before that dna contributor is identified. julie: that dna expert saying she has access to cutting-edge technology that could actually potentially solve the jonbenet ramsey murder mystery. her brother tweeted this. let s get to work. cc moore, joins us now. this is incredible. this sort of technology is cracking years-old, decades old cold murder cases and it could only be a matter of hours before the killer could be identified of the dna found on jonbenet is viable. tell us how the technology works. instead of just looking at a small portion of the dna, which
left-handed, the implication for the jury is clear. he couldn t be the killer. what s more, a dna expert said she expected to find escoto s dna on the victim s clothes. after all, they were husband and wife. but she found something more. there were several markers where his dna is not represented. dna traces for two different males and, get this, traces for a female. to standby lawyer terry lenamon, that could mean only one person. yolanda cerrillo, escoto s old girlfriend who said she was with him before and after the murder. who got immunity. lenamon says the first thing to know about yolanda is she s a liar. first, she knew nothing about the crime. then she said she did but only after the fact. the final story, he said, put yolanda front and center in planning the murder.
slipped inside a magazine sitting on carol s kitchen counter? and how did knapp s dna get mixed with carol s blood in a sample taken from a doorknob, leaving the house? that was evidence item #805. they called a dna expert. so you can see that all the way across that top line the numbers are the same as james knapp and there are many points of difference with steve democker. your point was that on each of these analyses, james knapp matches each one of these, and steve democker doesn t. that s right. reporter: in fact, neither steve democker s dna, nor his fingerprints, were ever found at the crime scene. so, had police focused on the wrong man all along? and because steve democker knew that, did he make a foolish mistake like a frightened man would? the anonymous e-mail, the voice in the vent, all of that occurs once he s placed in custody, loses hope and becomes desperate. that should not, in our opinion, should not have been introduced in this trial.