CLR: JonBenet FEATURE STORY

[Deepwater]

It's time to review the case. Here it is in total at the Crime Library:


MURDER OF JONBENET RAMSEY

By Marilyn Bardsley and Patrick Bellamy


Exposure - The JonBenet Ramsey Story

http://www.crimelibrary.com/graphics/photos/notorious_murders/famous/ramsey/Gallery/PG-Jonbenet-Ramsey(1).jpg

Painted Baby (]http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/famous/ramsey/index_1.html)

The first images of JonBenet Ramsey that were broadcast to the world showed a pretty little girl in heavy make-up and flamboyant costumes parading across a stage. At the time, the media described her as "a painted baby, a sexualized toddler beauty queen."

From the day in 1996 when JonBenet was found dead in the basement of her home in Boulder Colorado, the Boulder police and a large proportion of the world's media believed that her parents, John and Patsy Ramsey, were responsible for her death.

Prior to the murder of their daughter, John and Patsy Ramsey's life seemed almost ideal. Patsy, a former beauty queen, was married to a successful businessman. They had moved to Boulder in 1991 where John ran a computer company that he had started in his garage. The Ramseys readily adapted to their new life in Colorado and made many new friends. They built a large house in an elite suburb, and entertained often. Their last party in Boulder, just three days before the murder, was particularly happy. Over a hundred guests were present at a Christmas function. The Ramseys believed that they had good reason to celebrate. Patsy had warded off recurrance of ovarian cancer and John had been voted Boulder's "businessman of the year."

According to the Ramseys' testimony, they drove home the few blocks from a party at a friend's house on Christmas night. JonBenet had fallen asleep in the car so they carried her up the stairs to her room and put her to bed at 9:30 p.m. Shortly after, Patsy and John went to bed as they planned to get up early to prepare for a trip to their holiday home on Lake Michigan.

The next day, Patsy woke just after 5:00 a.m. and walked down the stairs to the kitchen. On the staircase, she found a two-and-a-half page note that said that JonBenet had been kidnapped by a "small foreign faction" and was being held for a ransom of $118,000. She was to be exchanged for the money the next day. The letter warned that if the money was not delivered, the child would be executed. Patsy yelled to John as she ran back up the stairs and opened the door to JonBenet's room. Finding she wasn't there, they made the decision to phone the police. The 911 dispatcher recorded Patsy's call at 5:25 a.m. The police arrived at the house seven minutes later.

The uniformed police officers that attended were openly suspicious from the start. The Ramseys, treating the ransom demand seriously, were already taking steps to raise the ransom money. The note said that the kidnappers would call John Ramsey but no call came.



CHAPTERS
1. Exposure 2. Suspicion Mounts 3. The Media Evidence 4. Personal Attack
5. "A Killer on the Loose" 6. Serious Allegations 7. John did it!
8. No Wait, Patsy did it! 9. Who Did It? 10. Someone Outside the House
11. Time of Death 12. A Continuing Saga 13. The Death of Innocence
14. The Case Goes Cold 15. Fighting Back 16. Fighting Back — the Deposition
17. Fighting Back — the Police 18. A Possible Witness 19. The Intruder Theory
20. A Stun Gun 21. The Book 22. The Book II 23. Still Under Suspicion
24. The Other Book 25. A Startling Revelation 26. Testing Time
27. The Ramseys Pass 28. The Media Circus 29. The Interviews
30. Put Up or Shut Up 31. The Confession 32. A Blocking Move
33. Smit's Investigative Analysis 34. Vindications At Last
35. The DNA Evidence 36. **New Chapter— John Mark Karr
37. **New Chapter—Hasty Investigation
38. Bibliography 39. The Authors-Marilyn Bardsley-Patrick Bellamy


Full Article Here (http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/famous/ramsey/index_1.html)

[docg]

The crime library essay looks at first glance to be a detailed review of all asects of the case. However, closer inspection reveals both a strong pro-Ramsey bias and an ignorance of certain basic evidentiary issues. The media has been full of such distorted reporting ever since Ramsey lawyer Lin Wood turned things around with an agressive campaign of intimidation, threatening lawsuits against anyone in the media daring to question the honesty and integrity of his clients.

The hype has been that there is "new evidence" eliminating the Ramseys. The fact is that, whenever new evidence has been uncovered, it has made the intruder theory increasingly unlikely. The hand print referred to in the crime library piece is now known to be from John's daughter Melinda; the "pubic hair" is an underarm hair of Patsy's; the Hi-Tec boot print probably originates with Burke, who testified that he owned a Hi-Tec boot; police did tests on panties from the same manufacturer as JonBenet's and discovered DNA inside some of them; internationally renowned forensic expert Henry Lee has publicly stated that the DNA may well have such an innocent source, either from the manufacturer or some other innocent encounter, making it irrelevant to the case. If the DNA could be irrelevant then there is no basis for the claim that it has exonerated John Ramsey -- or anyone else for that matter, including Karr.

For a much more thorough treatment of the case, doing justice to all aspects and all points of view, I strongly recommend the JonBenet Ramsey Case Encyclopedia: http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/

[Nancy#1Fan]

Originally posted by docg
The crime library essay looks at first glance to be a detailed review of all asects of the case. However, closer inspection reveals both a strong pro-Ramsey bias and an ignorance of certain basic evidentiary issues. The media has been full of such distorted reporting ever since Ramsey lawyer Lin Wood turned things around with an agressive campaign of intimidation, threatening lawsuits against anyone in the media daring to question the honesty and integrity of his clients.

The hype has been that there is "new evidence" eliminating the Ramseys. The fact is that, whenever new evidence has been uncovered, it has made the intruder theory increasingly unlikely. The hand print referred to in the crime library piece is now known to be from John's daughter Melinda; the "pubic hair" is an underarm hair of Patsy's; the Hi-Tec boot print probably originates with Burke, who testified that he owned a Hi-Tec boot; police did tests on panties from the same manufacturer as JonBenet's and discovered DNA inside some of them; internationally renowned forensic expert Henry Lee has publicly stated that the DNA may well have such an innocent source, either from the manufacturer or some other innocent encounter, making it irrelevant to the case. If the DNA could be irrelevant then there is no basis for the claim that it has exonerated John Ramsey -- or anyone else for that matter, including Karr.

For a much more thorough treatment of the case, doing justice to all aspects and all points of view, I strongly recommend the JonBenet Ramsey Case Encyclopedia: http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/ :beer: :beer:

[Athena]

Link to transcripts available:

http://www.acandyrose.com/

[Athena]

Originally posted by docg
The crime library essay looks at first glance to be a detailed review of all asects of the case. However, closer inspection reveals both a strong pro-Ramsey bias and an ignorance of certain basic evidentiary issues. The media has been full of such distorted reporting ever since Ramsey lawyer Lin Wood turned things around with an agressive campaign of intimidation, threatening lawsuits against anyone in the media daring to question the honesty and integrity of his clients.

The hype has been that there is "new evidence" eliminating the Ramseys. The fact is that, whenever new evidence has been uncovered, it has made the intruder theory increasingly unlikely. The hand print referred to in the crime library piece is now known to be from John's daughter Melinda; the "pubic hair" is an underarm hair of Patsy's; the Hi-Tec boot print probably originates with Burke, who testified that he owned a Hi-Tec boot; police did tests on panties from the same manufacturer as JonBenet's and discovered DNA inside some of them; internationally renowned forensic expert Henry Lee has publicly stated that the DNA may well have such an innocent source, either from the manufacturer or some other innocent encounter, making it irrelevant to the case. If the DNA could be irrelevant then there is no basis for the claim that it has exonerated John Ramsey -- or anyone else for that matter, including Karr.

For a much more thorough treatment of the case, doing justice to all aspects and all points of view, I strongly recommend the JonBenet Ramsey Case Encyclopedia: http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/

Written by forum posters.

[Devotion]

Originally posted by docg
The crime library essay looks at first glance to be a detailed review of all asects of the case. However, closer inspection reveals both a strong pro-Ramsey bias and an ignorance of certain basic evidentiary issues. The media has been full of such distorted reporting ever since Ramsey lawyer Lin Wood turned things around with an agressive campaign of intimidation, threatening lawsuits against anyone in the media daring to question the honesty and integrity of his clients.

The hype has been that there is "new evidence" eliminating the Ramseys. The fact is that, whenever new evidence has been uncovered, it has made the intruder theory increasingly unlikely. The hand print referred to in the crime library piece is now known to be from John's daughter Melinda; the "pubic hair" is an underarm hair of Patsy's; the Hi-Tec boot print probably originates with Burke, who testified that he owned a Hi-Tec boot; police did tests on panties from the same manufacturer as JonBenet's and discovered DNA inside some of them; internationally renowned forensic expert Henry Lee has publicly stated that the DNA may well have such an innocent source, either from the manufacturer or some other innocent encounter, making it irrelevant to the case. If the DNA could be irrelevant then there is no basis for the claim that it has exonerated John Ramsey -- or anyone else for that matter, including Karr.

For a much more thorough treatment of the case, doing justice to all aspects and all points of view, I strongly recommend the JonBenet Ramsey Case Encyclopedia: http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/

:read: IMO: I learned alot, thanks..

[Louisadelmar]

Originally posted by docg
The crime library essay looks at first glance to be a detailed review of all asects of the case. However, closer inspection reveals both a strong pro-Ramsey bias and an ignorance of certain basic evidentiary issues. The media has been full of such distorted reporting ever since Ramsey lawyer Lin Wood turned things around with an agressive campaign of intimidation, threatening lawsuits against anyone in the media daring to question the honesty and integrity of his clients.

The hype has been that there is "new evidence" eliminating the Ramseys. The fact is that, whenever new evidence has been uncovered, it has made the intruder theory increasingly unlikely. The hand print referred to in the crime library piece is now known to be from John's daughter Melinda; the "pubic hair" is an underarm hair of Patsy's; the Hi-Tec boot print probably originates with Burke, who testified that he owned a Hi-Tec boot; police did tests on panties from the same manufacturer as JonBenet's and discovered DNA inside some of them; internationally renowned forensic expert Henry Lee has publicly stated that the DNA may well have such an innocent source, either from the manufacturer or some other innocent encounter, making it irrelevant to the case. If the DNA could be irrelevant then there is no basis for the claim that it has exonerated John Ramsey -- or anyone else for that matter, including Karr.

For a much more thorough treatment of the case, doing justice to all aspects and all points of view, I strongly recommend the JonBenet Ramsey Case Encyclopedia: http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/

My feeling is since the original CrimeLibrary essay was anti-Ramsey it's only fair to now have a pro-Ramsey essay. Perhaps at some point they can find a writer capable of putting together an evenly balanced piece.

I agree the Wiki is excellent and Miss Marple should be congratulated on the excellent job he did.

[Athena]

Complete autopsy in html version so can be excerpted from:

http://www.cnn.com/US/9703/ramsey.case/final.autopsy.html

[Devotion]

Originally posted by Athena
Complete autopsy in html version so can be excerpted from:

http://www.cnn.com/US/9703/ramsey.case/final.autopsy.html

:read: IMO: Thanks for the link to the autopsy report...the details of what happened to this child are horrible....jmo

[rose]

YOU THINK WITH ALL THE TECHNOLOGY TODAY THAT SOMEONE CAN FIGURE OUT IF SOMEONE BESIDE THE FAMILY WAS IN THE RAMSEYS HOUSE THAT NIGHT. SO FAR I HAVENT HEARD ANY PROOF THAT THERE WAS:confused:

[webbsleuth]

The DNA is the key - - the killer could be identified at any time.

Meanwhile, it is a shame that so much misinformation is still online - - and used as a primer by CTV and other entities.

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by webbsleuth
The DNA is the key - - the killer could be identified at any time.

Meanwhile, it is a shame that so much misinformation is still online - - and used as a primer by CTV and other entities.

Misinformation that is repeated again and again. And some people are so determined that one of the Ramseys did it they continuously base their arguments on this misinformation.

I agree that DNA is the key. I hope one day it reveals the killer.
The thing that concerns me the most is that perhaps this person is dead and we may never know. JMO

[Athena]

PCR Analysis
PCR (polymerase chain reaction) is used to make millions of exact copies of DNA from a biological sample. DNA amplification with PCR allows DNA analysis on biological samples as small as a few skin cells. With RFLP, DNA samples would have to be about the size of a quarter. The ability of PCR to amplify such tiny quantities of DNA enables even highly degraded samples to be analyzed. Great care, however, must be taken to prevent contamination with other biological materials during the identifying, collecting, and preserving of a sample.

STR Analysis
Short tandem repeat (STR) technology is used to evaluate specific regions (loci) within nuclear DNA. Variability in STR regions can be used to distinguish one DNA profile from another. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) uses a standard set of 13 specific STR regions for CODIS. CODIS is a software program that operates local, state, and national databases of DNA profiles from convicted offenders, unsolved crime scene evidence, and missing persons. The odds that two individuals will have the same 13-loci DNA profile is about one in one billion.

Mitochondrial DNA Analysis
Mitochondrial DNA analysis (mtDNA) can be used to examine the DNA from samples that cannot be analyzed by RFLP or STR. Nuclear DNA must be extracted from samples for use in RFLP, PCR, and STR; however, mtDNA analysis uses DNA extracted from another cellular organelle called a mitochondrion. While older biological samples that lack nucleated cellular material, such as hair, bones, and teeth, cannot be analyzed with STR and RFLP, they can be analyzed with mtDNA. In the investigation of cases that have gone unsolved for many years, mtDNA is extremely valuable.

All mothers have the same mitochondrial DNA as their daughters. This is because the mitochondria of each new embryo comes from the mother's egg cell. The father's sperm contributes only nuclear DNA. Comparing the mtDNA profile of unidentified remains with the profile of a potential maternal relative can be an important technique in missing person investigations.

Y-Chromosome Analysis
The Y chromosome is passed directly from father to son, so the analysis of genetic markers on the Y chromosome is especially useful for tracing relationships among males or for analyzing biological evidence involving multiple male contributors.


http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresourc...forensics.shtml

[Athena]

An abbreviated day-by-day outline of the Ramsey Case Grand Jury meetings,
witnesses, and related activity.

September 15, 1998 through October 13, 1999

By law, most of the grand jury's activity is secret, and journalists can usually only make educated guesses as to who witnesses are, based on who appears at the Boulder County Justice Center, which houses the court room being used by the grand jury. A court order prohibits journalists from coming within 25 feet of jurors and prosecutors have started using the Justice Center's back corridor network to shuttle witnesses in and out of the courtroom undetected, making reporters' jobs even more difficult.

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer2/primer8_gjtl.html

[Eagle1]

Thanks for so many comments, which means not all of us have to actually read a long story during the Christmas rush.

One little thing, DocG, Patsy would definitely never let her underarm hair get that long! She'd be an ape woman, and that was one thing Patsy was not. I can't believe any authority called it a woman's underarm hair! Nobody, but nobody would have underarm hair resembling a pubic hair in any way.

It was probably a public hair, which I concede doesn't prove an intruder, nor does it prove any of the family did it, and as someone said, there's still the DNA which may some day match up to someone.