Not true. The Ramsey's DNA might be all over the house but I can't imagine why it would be found in areas where only someone like an attacking sex pervert might leave it - for example, in her panties/private areas or under her fingernails etc. I think the answer would depend on where the DNA was found and the amount etc. If the investigators are now saying 'the DNA is not a match', that statement implies to me that they have other DNA that they compared it against - and that DNA is not any of the Ramseys. And if that is the case, I ask my original question - why didn't it clear the Ramseys as potential suspects just as quickly?
Because apparently the DNA could have been from a factory worker where the panties were made.
So they have unidentified male DNA, but no proof it was from the killer only that it may be.