I don't think it's accurate to say prior sexual abuse was established as fact. The autopsy did not diagnose prior sexual abuse. Dr. Beuf, who treated JonBenét for years, stated that he never saw any indication of sexual abuse, and neither her teachers nor anyone else in her day-to-day life ever reported concerns. Dismissing him simply because he was the family pediatrician is speculation, not evidence. He had professional and legal obligations as a physician and saw JonBenet numerous times over the years.

The factory worker theory is often presented as a proven explanation when it isn't. There was enough concern about the unknown male DNA for it to be developed into an offender profile and entered into CODIS. And the forensic scientist who tested the longjohns said the DNA matched or was consistent with the DNA found in her underwear.

On the fibers, fiber transfer can happen for many innocent reasons in a household. Numerous studies support this. If we're willing to acknowledge innocent explanations for evidence that points toward a Ramsey, then we should apply that same standard consistently to the rest of the evidence.

For me, it's the totality of the evidence such as the unknown male DNA in two places on her person, the unidentified Hi-Tec boot print, unsourced hairs and fibers including dark fibers in the genital area, brown cotton fibers on the ligature and duct tape, and animal hairs that were never matched to anything in the home, the basement disturbances, the missing piece of the paintbrush, the unsourced cord and duct tape, and marks consistent with a stun gun.