Three Questions

[MissOtisRegrets]

Forgive me for starting a new thread. I have no idea where to put these questions:

1. I know nothing about stun guns. What effect would a stun gun have on a 45lb. little girl? How long and to what degree would she be "out"? If you were a kidnapper and were planning to put a little girl in a suitcase before taking her out of her house, would a zap from a stun gun be enough to ensure that she wouldn't begin to moan just as you boarded the train? Or would a good bash to the head be needed, as well?

2. Was it said that Bill McReynolds was eliminated partly because he couldn't have climbed through the window? Is that a concession to the "window theory"?

3. Someone did not have to give a handwriting sample because of a palsy. The handwriting on the ransom note is very shaky imo. Who was that who was excused from giving a handwriting sample?

TIA

:seeya:

MissO

[Coloradokares]

1. A stun gun can incapacitate even lead to death. Death is rare but has happened. On a small child. It would disable her for some time I'd think

2. McReynolds had just had heart surgery. He was cleard so many ways. They kept looking at him mainly because his wife Janet had written that play Rube

3. I believe you are talking about Mr. Barnhill the neighbor. Yes he had Palsy and couldn't write it took many tries to get a sample even. He is the one that took Jacques the Bichon so much.

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets
Forgive me for starting a new thread. I have no idea where to put these questions:

1. I know nothing about stun guns. What effect would a stun gun have on a 45lb. little girl? How long and to what degree would she be "out"? If you were a kidnapper and were planning to put a little girl in a suitcase before taking her out of her house, would a zap from a stun gun be enough to ensure that she wouldn't begin to moan just as you boarded the train? Or would a good bash to the head be needed, as well?

2. Was it said that Bill McReynolds was eliminated partly because he couldn't have climbed through the window? Is that a concession to the "window theory"?

3. Someone did not have to give a handwriting sample because of a palsy. The handwriting on the ransom note is very shaky imo. Who was that who was excused from giving a handwriting sample?

TIA

:seeya:

MissO

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets
Forgive me for starting a new thread. I have no idea where to put these questions:

1. I know nothing about stun guns. What effect would a stun gun have on a 45lb. little girl? How long and to what degree would she be "out"? If you were a kidnapper and were planning to put a little girl in a suitcase before taking her out of her house, would a zap from a stun gun be enough to ensure that she wouldn't begin to moan just as you boarded the train? Or would a good bash to the head be needed, as well?

2. Was it said that Bill McReynolds was eliminated partly because he couldn't have climbed through the window? Is that a concession to the "window theory"?

3. Someone did not have to give a handwriting sample because of a palsy. The handwriting on the ransom note is very shaky imo. Who was that who was excused from giving a handwriting sample?

TIA

:seeya:

MissO

http://www.selfdefenseproducts.com/stuninfo.htm

[MissOtisRegrets]

Thanks Ck and Wally. Wally, your site says full recovery in 5 to 10 minutes. I'll double that time for a child. But, I think a kidnapper might want to knock her out cold before taking her from the house. (I'm trying to figure out why the two different injuries.)

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by Coloradokares
1. A stun gun can incapacitate even lead to death. Death is rare but has happened. On a small child. It would disable her for some time I'd think

2. McReynolds had just had heart surgery. He was cleard so many ways. They kept looking at him mainly because his wife Janet had written that play Rube

3. I believe you are talking about Mr. Barnhill the neighbor. Yes he had Palsy and couldn't write it took many tries to get a sample even. He is the one that took Jacques the Bichon so much.

Colorado, Was Barnhill the neighbor who had a houseguest? I know very little about Barnhill, what do you folks know about this family?

[Coloradokares]

Yes the Barnhills were the neighbors who had Glenn Meyer living in their basement. I am not sure I'd call him a houseguest however they were also rather friendly with this person. They were a senior citizen couple. They were particularly fond of JonBenet and in fact had volunteerd so many times to watch the Bichon Frise dog, Jacques for them that Jacques had more or less taken up residency at the Barnhills. It is said of the Barnhills who cooperated in all ways they possibly could to the investigation that they were just harmless gentle people. If you watched the coverage of the news of the kidnapping then murder the Barnhills were interviewed alot. They were devastated over this whole matter. Detective Steve Thomas had nothing but good to say of them as for their steadfast cooperation.

Originally posted by LadyFisher
Colorado, Was Barnhill the neighbor who had a houseguest? I know very little about Barnhill, what do you folks know about this family?

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by Coloradokares
Yes the Barnhills were the neighbors who had Glenn Meyer living in their basement. I am not sure I'd call him a houseguest however they were also rather friendly with this person. They were a senior citizen couple. They were particularly fond of JonBenet and in fact had volunteerd so many times to watch the Bichon Frise dog, Jacques for them that Jacques had more or less taken up residency at the Barnhills. It is said of the Barnhills who cooperated in all ways they possibly could to the investigation that they were just harmless gentle people. If you watched the coverage of the news of the kidnapping then murder the Barnhills were interviewed alot. They were devastated over this whole matter. Detective Steve Thomas had nothing but good to say of them as for their steadfast cooperation.

Thank you, Colorado :) What is known about Glenn Meyer? Did he give DNA and writing samples?

[Athena]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


http://www.selfdefenseproducts.com/stuninfo.htm

Thanks. From your link; there are a list of states that are restricted from using stun guns. Colorado is not on it.

MsO - I'm at work and don't have access to books are time to do research but I know I've read something about each one of your questions. Will do more research when I get home this evening.

[Coloradokares]

Yes he did... along with varying other things as did about 600 people. Yeah blows your mind doesn't it. See that is what bothers me about the Ramsey claim that the Boulder PD looked at no one else. They exhaustively interviewed, gathered evidence on and tested and retested as necessary approximately 600 others. Some of course more extensively than others. Not only neighbors but mere acquaintences or hired help or known sexual offenders. The only friends the Ramseys even had left were the Stines. Everone else they threw under the bus as suspects in their daughters murder. Yet alone after over $2,000,000.00 of investigative costs to Colorado they alone remain under that famous Parasol of Persecution as they liked to refer it to. Patsy of course is deceased now. However I'd still like to see the matter go to a Special Prosecutor. JonBenet deserved better from us than she got. She deserved Justice at any price. Anyone whose life was taken from them does.


Aside issue...Did any of you happen to see that Raul Gomez Garcia did not even have to be present at his own sentencing for the murder of Officer Donny Young. Something is terribly wrong with justice anymore in the state of Colorado. The victims have no rights. Only the criminals....Its nuts.

Originally posted by LadyFisher
Thank you, Colorado :) What is known about Glenn Meyer? Did he give DNA and writing samples?

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by Athena


Thanks. From your link; there are a list of states that are restricted from using stun guns. Colorado is not on it.

MsO - I'm at work and don't have access to books are time to do research but I know I've read something about each one of your questions. Will do more research when I get home this evening.

Thanks, Athena. I am thinking that maybe the original plan was to remove JB from the house in the suitcase. She would be killed (by strangulation) in a remote area and abandoned. I don't think the stun gun would have guaranteed that she would remain completely motionless or quiet for the time that might be required. I think she might have been knocked out with the flashlight or whatever (even hit with the stun gun) before an attempt was made to put her into the suitcase. Maybe she wouldn't fit in the suitcase. Or maybe she would, but the suitcase couldn't be gotten past the ledge. While trying to force it, the perp made a scuff mark on the wall with his shoe. Whatever went wrong, it was decided to hide her in the basement, rather than take an unnecessary risk. But, she was still alive. She was removed from the suitcase (bringing fibers with her) and the blanket and Dr. Seuss book replaced. She was taken to the wine cellar for hiding. On the way, the perp saw the paintbox in the boiler room, put JB down, fashioned a garrotte with a piece of a paintbrush, and strangled her with it. He, then, carried her to the wine cellar and posed her as though she were handcuffed and suspended (arms above head, three loops tied sloppily and loose because she was unconscious and he was in a hurry now) and cleaned her (she had urinated when she lost consciousness), molested her, and cleaned her again to remove traces of himself. Then he closed the door and left.

This is all wild hypothesis, but I am trying to make sense for myself of why both the head wound and the garrotting.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Ck, is it true that homes in the area were being burglarized around the time of the murder? Was the perp in every case caught and eliminated as the murderer of JBR? I think it's possible that a local burglar may have decided to graduate to the next level of crime (kidnapping) with all the talk of the success of John Ramsey and Access Graphics.

[Coloradokares]

Actually I do believe there were a few. Not a rash of breakins or anything but around Christmas there always tends to be a few. For whatever reason. I honestly cannot say if they examined ever burglary suspect against the murder, I know they did all known sexual offenders. Good question MissOtisRegrets Excellent Question!

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets
Ck, is it true that homes in the area were being burglarized around the time of the murder? Was the perp in every case caught and eliminated as the murderer of JBR? I think it's possible that a local burglar may have decided to graduate to the next level of crime (kidnapping) with all the talk of the success of John Ramsey and Access Graphics.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by Coloradokares
Actually I do believe there were a few. Not a rash of breakins or anything but around Christmas there always tends to be a few. For whatever reason. I honestly cannot say if they examined ever burglary suspect against the murder, I know they did all known sexual offenders. Good question MissOtisRegrets Excellent Question!



Thanks, Ck!

[LindaA]

I'm wonderinghow much wipig down would havea been necessary to remove all traces of the murderer's DNA. And what happened to the cloth he used?

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


Thanks, Athena. I am thinking that maybe the original plan was to remove JB from the house in the suitcase. She would be killed (by strangulation) in a remote area and abandoned. I don't think the stun gun would have guaranteed that she would remain completely motionless or quiet for the time that might be required. I think she might have been knocked out with the flashlight or whatever (even hit with the stun gun) before an attempt was made to put her into the suitcase. Maybe she wouldn't fit in the suitcase. Or maybe she would, but the suitcase couldn't be gotten past the ledge. While trying to force it, the perp made a scuff mark on the wall with his shoe. Whatever went wrong, it was decided to hide her in the basement, rather than take an unnecessary risk. But, she was still alive. She was removed from the suitcase (bringing fibers with her) and the blanket and Dr. Seuss book replaced. She was taken to the wine cellar for hiding. On the way, the perp saw the paintbox in the boiler room, put JB down, fashioned a garrotte with a piece of a paintbrush, and strangled her with it. He, then, carried her to the wine cellar and posed her as though she were handcuffed and suspended (arms above head, three loops tied sloppily and loose because she was unconscious and he was in a hurry now) and cleaned her (she had urinated when she lost consciousness), molested her, and cleaned her again to remove traces of himself. Then he closed the door and left.

This is all wild hypothesis, but I am trying to make sense for myself of why both the head wound and the garrotting. 0

Respectfully, I think this is a highly unlikely scenario. First, to plan to use a suitcase from the home narrows the list of perpetrators to a family member, or freind who would know that a large suitcase is available.

Second, it's fairly obvious that JB wouldn't fit in the suitcase, or that it would be a very tight fit. You only have to see a picture of the suitcase to have real doubt as to whether a child could be put in it.

Third, you make it sound like the perp got the idea to fashion a garrotte when he saw the paintbrush. But you also insist he brought the cord with him - why then did he have it if he wasn't intending to use it all along?

Fouth, you now have made the killer a necrophiliac - which is possible. But do you really need to add more motives and mulitple personalities to this mysterious intruder? He's a burglar/paedophile/necrophiliac/kidnapper/revenge killer. Yeah, oooookaaaay.

[lucky13]

IMO, JB's lifeless, limp body COULD have been stuffed into that suitcase. (Children are very limber) I've stated before that I did 'an experiment' (it was harmless-don't ask!) & it IS possible. Arms up, alongside the head, body bent in half, knees up near head. Wouldn't work if the child were alive/awake, but for a small, dead body, it could work. The blanket would not have fit, only the body. But I think that the plan was to get her out of the house in the suitcase, to dump her body. The blanket was going to be used to cover her up- just like she was in the cellar. And the Dr. Suess book (it would fit) was going to be put with her as a 'loving gesture', like covering her.
So my theory is that John was going to take her body out of the house in the suitcase, all part of his plan in his ransom note- (...bring an adequate size attache...)- to get the ransom money after he hid or dumped her somewhere first. Anyone seeing him leave the house with the suitcase would later 'know' that it was for the ransom money purposes. This was before the original plan was ruined by the 911 call.
I also think that he wrote the part about her being beheaded because he wanted to eventually throw her into a body of water to dispose of her. After the intense garrotting, her head would have likely easily come off after being in the water for a period of time. ( think Lacy Peterson) Then it would all make sense if they ever found her body- according to the note. MOO

[Ames]

Originally posted by lucky13
IMO, JB's lifeless, limp body COULD have been stuffed into that suitcase. (Children are very limber) I've stated before that I did 'an experiment' (it was harmless-don't ask!) & it IS possible. Arms up, alongside the head, body bent in half, knees up near head. Wouldn't work if the child were alive/awake, but for a small, dead body, it could work. The blanket would not have fit, only the body. But I think that the plan was to get her out of the house in the suitcase, to dump her body. The blanket was going to be used to cover her up- just like she was in the cellar. And the Dr. Suess book (it would fit) was going to be put with her as a 'loving gesture', like covering her.
So my theory is that John was going to take her body out of the house in the suitcase, all part of his plan in his ransom note- (...bring an adequate size attache...)- to get the ransom money after he hid or dumped her somewhere first. Anyone seeing him leave the house with the suitcase would later 'know' that it was for the ransom money purposes. This was before the original plan was ruined by the 911 call.
I also think that he wrote the part about her being beheaded because he wanted to eventually throw her into a body of water to dispose of her. After the intense garrotting, her head would have likely easily come off after being in the water for a period of time. ( think Lacy Peterson) Then it would all make sense if they ever found her body- according to the note. MOO


Now here is a gruesome thought...I wonder if J had planned on putting her in the suitcase, and taking her to Michigan and dumping the body THERE...maybe in Lake Michigan? IMO

[Ames]

I forgot to add, and didn't make it in time to edit...that the Ramsey's had a vacation home on Lake Michigan...(for those of you that didn't know that). If her body was dumped into the lake, inside of the suitcase that had been weighted down...it is highly unlikey that her body would have ever been found. IMO

[Coloradokares]

The internal structures of JonBenets neck for as bad as it was had actually minimal internal damage. The Hyoid bone was not even fractured. Which in garroting is almost always a given. Yes she had ligature markings and died of asphyxiation ( strangulation ) also secondary was the head trauma. Not sure why beheading was included but I think it might have been to give a terrorist element to that small foreign faction.

Originally posted by lucky13
IMO, JB's lifeless, limp body COULD have been stuffed into that suitcase. (Children are very limber) I've stated before that I did 'an experiment' (it was harmless-don't ask!) & it IS possible. Arms up, alongside the head, body bent in half, knees up near head. Wouldn't work if the child were alive/awake, but for a small, dead body, it could work. The blanket would not have fit, only the body. But I think that the plan was to get her out of the house in the suitcase, to dump her body. The blanket was going to be used to cover her up- just like she was in the cellar. And the Dr. Suess book (it would fit) was going to be put with her as a 'loving gesture', like covering her.
So my theory is that John was going to take her body out of the house in the suitcase, all part of his plan in his ransom note- (...bring an adequate size attache...)- to get the ransom money after he hid or dumped her somewhere first. Anyone seeing him leave the house with the suitcase would later 'know' that it was for the ransom money purposes. This was before the original plan was ruined by the 911 call.
I also think that he wrote the part about her being beheaded because he wanted to eventually throw her into a body of water to dispose of her. After the intense garrotting, her head would have likely easily come off after being in the water for a period of time. ( think Lacy Peterson) Then it would all make sense if they ever found her body- according to the note. MOO

[WallyCleaver]

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/archive/index.php/t-4708


Apparently the stun gun technology of 1996 would not have rendered a person unconscious.

Also the air taser would have been very loud.

[Athena]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver
http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/archive/index.php/t-4708


Apparently the stun gun technology of 1996 would not have rendered a person unconscious.

Also the air taser would have been very loud.

According to unbiased sites about the Air Taser of 1996 -- the 7W was not enough power to stop someone with a psychosis or with adrenaline pumping. Hardly think JBR meets that criteria.

I highly doubt that the Taser Gun Company would want to be associated in the death of a child. Tuttle is on Air Taser's payroll. From that post you linked to he also said the marks would be inconsistent with a child "SQUIRMING". JBR was asleep. Who says she moved at all?

That post also goes on to say that Doberson's statements went unrebutted when that is not true. It also says he would not make a public statement either which he in fact has done in a couple of the documentaries re: the intruder theory.

Robert Statbucker was hired to dispute Doberson's statements and was discredited due to him being on Air Taser's payroll as well. The forum you linked to only gives one side of their supporting documentation. The site is extremely anti-Ramsey. I am a registered member of that site and refuse to post there because you are not "allowed" to talk about Fleet White or Steve Thomas or say anything positive about the Ramseys. I cannot participate in a forum that is so one-sided and narrow-minded. JMO


In July 1996, a 29-year-old woman, Kimberly Lashon Watkins, died after being shot by police with a taser gun in Pomona, California. The Los Angeles County Sheriff's department said that she had been driving under the influence of drugs and had crashed into a wall and a parked car, before resisting arrest. The Sheriff's Deputy is reported to have described the taser gun as "a kind of debilitating thing where the shock is supposed to catch you off guard... Something from the charge did not agree with her system." After being shot with the taser gun, Kimberly was taken to hospital where her heart stopped. An autopsy was pending.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGACT400011997?open&of=ENG-CYP

WHAT ARE THE AFTEREFFECTS?
A person hit with an AIR TASER will feel dazed for several minutes. The pulsating electrical output causes involuntary muscle contractions and a resulting sense of vertigo. It can momentarily stun or render an attacker unconscious. Yet, the AIR TASER’s low electrical amperage and short duration of pulsating current, ensures a non-lethal charge. Moreover, it does not cause permanent damage or long-term aftereffects to muscles, nerves or other body functions. A January 1987 Annals of Emergency Medicine study reported TASER technology leaves no long term injuries compared with 50% long term injuries for gun shot injuries.

http://www.factsfinder.com/products/stunguntaser.htm

January 1995 First AIR TASER production model successfully introduced at Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.
January 1996 Dr. Stratbucker tested power settings of the AIR TASER and subsequently tested increased power setting of up to four times the power setting of a 7 Watt AIR TASER to establish a power setting safety margin for the AIR TASER and for higher power. These experiments corroborated earlier findings in consulting reports and peer review journals that the electrical emissions from stun type pulse generators, delivered to the body surface do not cause serious cardiac rhythm abnormalities in the otherwise healthy heart including electrical outputs equivalent to 400% the capacitance and 300% the battery voltage of the AIR TASER.

http://www.taser.com/pages/pr/corpbackground.html

[MissOtisRegrets]

Thanks for the info, Athena!

:seeya:

MissO

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by Athena


According to unbiased sites about the Air Taser of 1996 -- the 7W was not enough power to stop someone with a psychosis or with adrenaline pumping. Hardly think JBR meets that criteria.

I highly doubt that the Taser Gun Company would want to be associated in the death of a child. Tuttle is on Air Taser's payroll. From that post you linked to he also said the marks would be inconsistent with a child "SQUIRMING". JBR was asleep. Who says she moved at all?

That post also goes on to say that Doberson's statements went unrebutted when that is not true. It also says he would not make a public statement either which he in fact has done in a couple of the documentaries re: the intruder theory.

Robert Statbucker was hired to dispute Doberson's statements and was discredited due to him being on Air Taser's payroll as well. The forum you linked to only gives one side of their supporting documentation. The site is extremely anti-Ramsey. I am a registered member of that site and refuse to post there because you are not "allowed" to talk about Fleet White or Steve Thomas or say anything positive about the Ramseys. I cannot participate in a forum that is so one-sided and narrow-minded. JMO


In July 1996, a 29-year-old woman, Kimberly Lashon Watkins, died after being shot by police with a taser gun in Pomona, California. The Los Angeles County Sheriff's department said that she had been driving under the influence of drugs and had crashed into a wall and a parked car, before resisting arrest. The Sheriff's Deputy is reported to have described the taser gun as "a kind of debilitating thing where the shock is supposed to catch you off guard... Something from the charge did not agree with her system." After being shot with the taser gun, Kimberly was taken to hospital where her heart stopped. An autopsy was pending.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGACT400011997?open&of=ENG-CYP

WHAT ARE THE AFTEREFFECTS?
A person hit with an AIR TASER will feel dazed for several minutes. The pulsating electrical output causes involuntary muscle contractions and a resulting sense of vertigo. It can momentarily stun or render an attacker unconscious. Yet, the AIR TASER’s low electrical amperage and short duration of pulsating current, ensures a non-lethal charge. Moreover, it does not cause permanent damage or long-term aftereffects to muscles, nerves or other body functions. A January 1987 Annals of Emergency Medicine study reported TASER technology leaves no long term injuries compared with 50% long term injuries for gun shot injuries.

http://www.factsfinder.com/products/stunguntaser.htm

January 1995 First AIR TASER production model successfully introduced at Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.
January 1996 Dr. Stratbucker tested power settings of the AIR TASER and subsequently tested increased power setting of up to four times the power setting of a 7 Watt AIR TASER to establish a power setting safety margin for the AIR TASER and for higher power. These experiments corroborated earlier findings in consulting reports and peer review journals that the electrical emissions from stun type pulse generators, delivered to the body surface do not cause serious cardiac rhythm abnormalities in the otherwise healthy heart including electrical outputs equivalent to 400% the capacitance and 300% the battery voltage of the AIR TASER.

http://www.taser.com/pages/pr/corpbackground.html

If you're not willing to believe people with vested financial interest, then shouldn't you discount John Douglas as well?

You're right that JB probably wasn't squirming, but most IDIs think she was shot twice. Surely she'd have been squirming after the firts time.

[Athena]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


If you're not willing to believe people with vested financial interest, then shouldn't you discount John Douglas as well?

You're right that JB probably wasn't squirming, but most IDIs think she was shot twice. Surely she'd have been squirming after the firts time.

She should have been immobilized after the first one. She only weighed 45 lbs: :confused: I have not seen an alternative explanation for those marks especially because both the mark on her back and on her face were EXACTLY the same measurement.

John Douglas was not discredited -- Stratbucker was. In addition to that and I'll say this until I'm blue in the face -- I do not believe Douglas would have risked his credibility on the side of possible child killers. JMO

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by Athena


She should have been immobilized after the first one. She only weighed 45 lbs: :confused: I have not seen an alternative explanation for those marks especially because both the mark on her back and on her face were EXACTLY the same measurement.

John Douglas was not discredited -- Stratbucker was. In addition to that and I'll say this until I'm blue in the face -- I do not believe Douglas would have risked his credibility on the side of possible child killers. JMO

I didn't say he was discredited. I said he should be discounted for the same reasons you discount the rep from the Air Taser Co.

You can keep repeating the mantra all you like, but it doesn't change the fact that Douglas was paid by the Rs.

If she was imobilized after the first shot, then why a second one.

Apparently the Taser gun of '96 was loud. That seems to suggest it's unlikely it would have been used in her bedroom.

[nuisanceposter]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


I didn't say he was discredited. I said he should be discounted for the same reasons you discount the rep from the Air Taser Co.

You can keep repeating the mantra all you like, but it doesn't change the fact that Douglas was paid by the Rs.

If she was imobilized after the first shot, then why a second one.

Apparently the Taser gun of '96 was loud. That seems to suggest it's unlikely it would have been used in her bedroom.

I have to agree on all counts.

If you're discounting Stratbucker's opinion because he's on AirTaser's payroll, then to be fair, you have to discount JD's opinion, as he is on the Ramsey's payroll.

Why indeed would anyone zap her a second time if the stun gun (if one was used) knocked her out the first time? There would have been plenty of time to set that garotte around her neck and yank it tight or whack her on the head before she came to and struggled - and we know she didn't struggle, because there is literally NO sign of a struggle. She didn't have her blood or her skin under her nails - Smit said she did, but he's the only one. It's not in the autopsy. I'd like to see a source other than Smit saying that.

Loud enough that parents even a floor up would have heard it. I know a poster on another board who has a stun gun, and has used it on himself. He said it hurt very much, and in addition to the stun gun being loud itself, there was no way he could have avoided screaming in pain. I don't know what made those marks, but I am not convinced it was a stun gun.

[shill]

Funny how people who explain why JB was still in the house have said the Ramseys didn't get rid of the body because they couldn't bare to put their beloved daughter alone out in the cold and yet others have no problem theorizing the Ramseys were willing to stuff her in a suitcase and dump her from a plane in Lake Michigan. Two widely different interpretations of how the Ramseys would behave if guilty.
Maybe the suitcase has nothing to do with anything and maybe a intruder could have entered another way other then the basement window.

[lucky13]

I think that the only reason the Ramseys did not have JB's body exhumed to determine if a stun gun was used conclusively, is because they thought it would incriminate them further as suspects. I think that John did own a stun gun. There was a booklet/video, (whatever) that was found in the drawer about stun guns. He says he only had the info- but no stun gun...
Coroner Meyer stated that he thought a stun gun COULD have been used.
Dr. Werner Spitz(worked on J.F. Kennedy assassination case) is 100% certain that the marks are not from a stun gun. He said the marks are not burns, but abrasions. He said that the marks look like what was left of a snap on a piece of clothing. One mark has a 'boat-shaped' structure that the others don't. (???) (from Oct.'02- 48 Hours Investigates-Searching For a Killer)
WHO KNOWS??????? (only God, the killer, & JonBenet)
Just out of curiousity, anyone know if JB's Barbie nightgown had any snaps on it??

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by LindaA
I'm wonderinghow much wipig down would havea been necessary to remove all traces of the murderer's DNA. And what happened to the cloth he used? You raise some good ?s. I am assuming no such cloth was found in the basement...wonder if the perp carried a handkerchief?

[LindaA]

Originally posted by shill
Funny how people who explain why JB was still in the house have said the Ramseys didn't get rid of the body because they couldn't bare to put their beloved daughter alone out in the cold and yet others have no problem theorizing the Ramseys were willing to stuff her in a suitcase and dump her from a plane in Lake Michigan. Two widely different interpretations of how the Ramseys would behave if guilty.
Maybe the suitcase has nothing to do with anything and maybe a intruder could have entered another way other then the basement window.

Agreed. More to the point, they feel they could throttle her while she was still alive (assuming the head injury was accidental and came first) and ram her with a broken paint brush to cover up what really happened, but could not stand to leave her body outside in the snow. That just doesn't add up to me.

[LindaA]

Originally posted by lucky13
I think that the only reason the Ramseys did not have JB's body exhumed to determine if a stun gun was used conclusively, is because they thought it would incriminate them further as suspects. I think that John did own a stun gun. There was a booklet/video, (whatever) that was found in the drawer about stun guns. He says he only had the info- but no stun gun...
Coroner Meyer stated that he thought a stun gun COULD have been used.
Dr. Werner Spitz(worked on J.F. Kennedy assassination case) is 100% certain that the marks are not from a stun gun. He said the marks are not burns, but abrasions. He said that the marks look like what was left of a snap on a piece of clothing. One mark has a 'boat-shaped' structure that the others don't. (???) (from Oct.'02- 48 Hours Investigates-Searching For a Killer)
WHO KNOWS??????? (only God, the killer, & JonBenet)
Just out of curiousity, anyone know if JB's Barbie nightgown had any snaps on it??

I'm missing something here. You say John had a stun gun. If so, why didn't the police find it? Not sure what you are basing your argument on. Having an advertising brochure on something doesn't indicate you actually own it.

If you agree with the sources you cited that the marks were not made by a stun gun, then it doesn't matter if John had one or not, because it wasn't used in the crime.

BTW, I don't buy the snap theory. JMO.

[LindaA]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
You raise some good ?s. I am assuming no such cloth was found in the basement...wonder if the perp carried a handkerchief?

Sorry for the typos in my original post.

I've never heard that such a cloth was ever found. I've asked about it before, but never gotten an answer. There were the fibers in her genital area that were attributed to JR's shirt. There seems to be some question as to the color of those fibers and whether or not the attorney who asked him about them was lying or not.

[nuisanceposter]

Originally posted by LindaA


Sorry for the typos in my original post.

I've never heard that such a cloth was ever found. I've asked about it before, but never gotten an answer. There were the fibers in her genital area that were attributed to JR's shirt. There seems to be some question as to the color of those fibers and whether or not the attorney who asked him about them was lying or not.

Maybe that cloth left with Pam Paugh, when she raided the house "for funeral clothes" and loaded down a police cruiser with boxes and bags full of "mementos." What were police thinking, allowing her to do that, even giving her a ride and letting her use the cruiser to remove evidence from a crime scene? Argh!

There is a question as to color of fibers, but Levin, as an attorney, is legally bound not to lie in a situation like that. Some people think perhaps police lied to Levin about the existence of fibers consistent with clothes worn by the Rs that night, but their reports came from CBI and have never been made public, so we don't know exactly what CBI found. I would think if the police are saying CBI found something, then they found something.

[LindaA]

Nuisance, I believe there was a detailed inventory done of what was taken from the house by Ms. Paugh which is why it took so long to retrieve them. And no, I can't imagine any LE agency allowing that with or without an inventory!!

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by nuisanceposter

<snip>

but Levin, as an attorney, is legally bound not to lie in a situation like that
<snip>



Not true - IMO>

[LindaA]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


Not true - IMO>

I agree. I believe ethat has been discussed here on one of the threads already.

[bullmoose]

Regarding Lucky13's statement that he believed John Ramsey had a stun gun because he had a brochure/video: At trade shows and trade conventions attendees generally receive a goody or swag bag upon registration filled with promotional literature that has lots of room for samples, freebies and yes, even videos of products on display. I just attended a similar show, and its astounding to me what ended up in my swag bag; stuffed in by the various vendors. I think that is the explanation for the video in the Ramsey home; that it was given him at a computer tradeshow; IMO it is a logical, believable explanation.

[LindaA]

Bullmoose, I have read that also. I believe the material was in Spanish, a language neither of the adult Ramseys spoke, so they just stuck it in a drawer.

[shill]

Originally posted by LindaA
Nuisance, I believe there was a detailed inventory done of what was taken from the house by Ms. Paugh which is why it took so long to retrieve them. And no, I can't imagine any LE agency allowing that with or without an inventory!! If the BP believed Pam Paugh was asked to remove evidence by the Ramseys, they could give her a lie detecter test and ask her.

And you're assuming the Ramseys left evidence that needed to be removed.

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by shill
If the BP believed Pam Paugh was asked to remove evidence by the Ramseys, they could give her a lie detecter test and ask her.

And you're assuming the Ramseys left evidence that needed to be removed.

We do know that according to Steve Thomas that there were things removed in zipped bags and closed boxes. If Pam Paugh was requested to take a lie detector test would she pay for it or would John like the others taken by the Ramsey family. Personally I think John and Patsy when she was still alive would have ended this nightmare for themselves if they were so innocent in this read this to mean without any knowledge if they'd of been willing to take the 10 lie detector tests that Patsy said she'd be willing to take. It took several as it was to get inconclusive results. Fact not bias.

[shill]

You could still put Pam Paugh in the hot seat and try and break her.
Would Pam Paugh perpetuate the alleged cover up?
You confess to one person, and eventually they will confide in another person and so on, until someone spills the beans.
IMO John and Patsy, if guilty, would have to keep their secret from everyone and anyone, or they would have been ratted out by now.

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by shill
You could still put Pam Paugh in the hot seat and try and break her.
Would Pam Paugh perpetuate the alleged cover up?
You confess to one person, and eventually they will confide in another person and so on, until someone spills the beans.
IMO John and Patsy, if guilty, would have to keep their secret from everyone and anyone, or they would have been ratted out by now.

You may well be right. Would they have shared any knowledge with anyone if they infact had it. Not if their intent was to remain silent so they wouldn't loose every member of their family. Not if they in fact bore responsibility. Either way your right if they ever spoke of anything it was only between themselves late at night under the covers. perhaps attorney client privelege?

[lucky13]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets
Ck, is it true that homes in the area were being burglarized around the time of the murder? Was the perp in every case caught and eliminated as the murderer of JBR? I think it's possible that a local burglar may have decided to graduate to the next level of crime (kidnapping) with all the talk of the success of John Ramsey and Access Graphics.
If ANYTHING had actually been stolen, this would be more believable. What burglar would go through all of that, & then not even take a thing with him when he left?? MOO

[nuisanceposter]

Originally posted by lucky13

If ANYTHING had actually been stolen, this would be more believable. What burglar would go through all of that, & then not even take a thing with him when he left?? MOO

Excellent point, and following that logic, what kidnapper would go through all he had to do in that house with feeding JonBenet pineapple and assaulting her, wiping her down, redressing her, and composing that long and ridiculous RN without even bothering to take the intended kidnap victim for the ransom he claims he there for in the first place?

What pedophile would take the time and the risk to handwrite that RN if he never intended to kidnap JonBenet at all, much less chance getting caught by spending extra time seeking out clean underwear and redressing her and finding her favorite blanket and wrapping her up in it before he left - seemingly unafraid of being caught by the other residents of the house while he took as much time as he needed to do it?

Only someone who lived in that house would have been that comfortable during the time it took to do all that, and only someone who cared for JonBenet would have shown her as much respect in death, imo. A kidnapper would have taken her and left right away, and so would a pedophile.

[MissOtisRegrets]

What makes you think she was redressed? The underpants she was wearing were stained with urine and blood.

[nuisanceposter]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets
What makes you think she was redressed? The underpants she was wearing were stained with urine and blood.

The underwear JonBenet was found in were brand-new, unwashed size 12/14s Bloomie's underwear, bought on a trip to NYC. They were originally intended to be a gift for Patsy's niece Jenny, but somehow (and Patsy is vague about how) they ended up in JonBenet's underwear drawer in a packaged that only had the particular pair she was found in removed. JonBenet usually wore size 4/6 underwear, but Patsy claimed she liked the bigger ones so much that they "made the decision" to keep them.

Deposition here, post # 36:

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=7107&page=3&pp=12

Comparison of underwear sizes here:

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=7128


Thinking the redresser got them from the package when s/he wiped down and redressed JonBenet is my opinion.

Patsy said that she removed JonBenet's velvet pants and dressed her in long johns, but can't recall if JonBenet was wearing those larger size 12s or not. Common sense and experience with my own daughter tells me that if JonBenet had been wearing those size 12s, Patsy certainly would have noticed. In the comparison pictures, you can see the larger size of undies is quite a bit different than the smaller size, to the point where they would be baggy and gape open in the wrong places. I would think, again, my opinion, that if Patsy had pulled off the velvet pants, the underwear would have come down with them. If not, it should have been obvious that she was wearing the larger size. I can't imagine a mother like Patsy who made sure her daughter was dressed well would have overlooked underwear that much too large, so it is my speculation that the person who redressed JonBenet intentionally opened the package of size 12/14s to redress JonBenet in them.

There has been much speculation as to why that particular pair. That Christmas was a Wednesday, and the underwear had Wednesday written on them. If Patsy didn't notice JonBenet was wearing size 12 undies when she dressed her in long johns, I would assume, from my own expewrience as a mother changing the clothes of a sleeping child, that JonBenet was not wearing the size 12s when Patsy changed her clothes. No one seems to know if the size 4/6 Wednesday pair of underwear were ever found, and BPD spent some time tracking down the package of Bloomie's that the size 12s came from, only to find out the Ramsey lawyers had it in their possession.

And then there's PagingDrDetect's theory, post # 71:

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41768&page=3&pp=25

[MissOtisRegrets]

Thanks, np. I thought you meant JB had been redressed after the crime. She obviously hadn't been. You meant between the time they got home and the crime.

[shill]

Makes no sense!!!!
No one knows what happened to the size 4/5, yet no one knows if she was wearing size 4/5.
I have never seen a photo of JB from the waist down from this crime, has any one?
I must have missed the links on the size 12 panties she was found in, so can some one supply proof of this large Wednesday panties?

[thewhitewitch1]

Originally posted by shill
Makes no sense!!!!
No one knows what happened to the size 4/5, yet no one knows if she was wearing size 4/5.
I have never seen a photo of JB from the waist down from this crime, has any one?
I must have missed the links on the size 12 panties she was found in, so can some one supply proof of this large Wednesday panties?

Go to acandyrose.com and read the interviews. I can't remember which one but it's one of Patsys. It is discussed in depth. I'd go find out for ya but I am too tired right now.

[LadyFisher]

I was looking at the basement floor plan in TCTHU! You have to enter the wine cellar through the boiler room...I cannot believe that a random robber would have found that room! This perp already knew that room was there, that narrows down the suspect list...it had to be someone that was working in that home or had previously worked in that home! What does that leave us, the housekeeper's family, and the construction crew! jmho :seeya:

[nuisanceposter]

Or someone who lived there.

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by nuisanceposter
Or someone who lived there. Hi, nuisance :) Hope you all voted today! :) I did! Nuisance, have you read the book "The Cases That Haunt Us" by John Douglas? If so, what is your opinion of his conclusions on this case? If not, I suggest it worth reading, the paperback is very inexpensive! I would like to hear your feedback on it...I respect your opinions and believe you are openminded!

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I was looking at the basement floor plan in TCTHU! You have to enter the wine cellar through the boiler room...I cannot believe that a random robber would have found that room! This perp already knew that room was there, that narrows down the suspect list...it had to be someone that was working in that home or had previously worked in that home! What does that leave us, the housekeeper's family, and the construction crew! jmho :seeya:

Of course the family itself had no knowledge of this room at all. Only the hired help. Or the consturction worker who was just out trying to make a living. What if your boss decided since you worked for him you'd be the logical one to have commited a heinous crime. :confused: What I agree to is this. You might have needed to know that room was there. That does narrow down the suspect list. Being there when the murder was committed narrows it down further. It does not narrow it down to just the Ramsey's it also does not eleminate them from suspicion either:shrug:

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


Of course the family itself had no knowledge of this room at all. Only the hired help. Or the consturction worker who was just out trying to make a living. What if your boss decided since you worked for him you'd be the logical one to have commited a heinous crime. :confused: What I agree to is this. You might have needed to know that room was there. That does narrow down the suspect list. Being there when the murder was committed narrows it down further. It does not narrow it down to just the Ramsey's it also does not eleminate them from suspicion either:shrug: I have ruled out the Ramseys as suspects, Colorado! Every individual that was employed in that home before the murder should have been given DNA tests...and no, I don't think they all were! The Ramseys hair and DNA do not match.....the perp is still out there! He is one sick individual that needs help imho!

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I have ruled out the Ramseys as suspects, Colorado! Every individual that was employed in that home before the murder should have been given DNA tests...and no, I don't think they all were! The Ramseys hair and DNA do not match.....the perp is still out there! He is one sick individual that needs help imho!

Sorry to say most people and law enforcement agencies have not ruled them out. That is because the very DNA that cleard them may be artifact. Being highly degraded means that the DNA is older than the blood it co mingled with. In otherwords may not be the murderers DNA at all. Only Smit Augustin and Grey put forth the statements that BPD has the complete profile and that the DNA under her nails matched the DNA on the panty. DA Lacey even had that explained in great detail at the press conference. I provided that link yesterday. The transcript of the press conference of DA Mary Lacey to announce the reason behind not charging John Mark Karr. I don't believe the Ramseys can totally be ruled out till there is a trial. Even Alex Hunter believed they were not innocent in this matter. He just wanted AIRTIGHT and hopefully confession. Yes I agree obviously the perp is out there and a very sick individual who needs help. That is where I draw the line. I do hope though that a special prosecutor is appointed by the new Governor of Colorado. As a taxpayer I'll even check mark to donate some bucks if they do on our taxes. Lets get this in a court then remove all doubt as to the Umbrella of suspicion. Lets see all the facts laid out in front of a jury.

[bullmoose]

I believe that Patsy Ramsey herself wanted a trial so that she could be cleared; the BPD's Steve Thomas wanted a book deal[and got it], the DA's office wanted an indictable suspect to take to trial, and the Grand Jury wanted more evidence before they even indicted someone. The burden of evidence needed for an indictment is nowhere nearly so high as for a conviction in a jury trial; the fact remains that the only conviction ever gotten in the case was in the court of public opinion with Steve Thomas as the presiding hatchetman[or judge] and the readers of such tabloids as the Globe as the jury[ potential lynchmob]. A real trial would have been preferable to the fiasco of a case this has been. In a real trial, the evidence would have been laid out for a judge and jury and a decision made; instead we are left arguing about what the evidence means, if it even is relevant.

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by bullmoose
I believe that Patsy Ramsey herself wanted a trial so that she could be cleared; the BPD's Steve Thomas wanted a book deal[and got it], the DA's office wanted an indictable suspect to take to trial, and the Grand Jury wanted more evidence before they even indicted someone. The burden of evidence needed for an indictment is nowhere nearly so high as for a conviction in a jury trial; the fact remains that the only conviction ever gotten in the case was in the court of public opinion with Steve Thomas as the presiding hatchetman[or judge] and the readers of such tabloids as the Globe as the jury[ potential lynchmob]. A real trial would have been preferable to the fiasco of a case this has been. In a real trial, the evidence would have been laid out for a judge and jury and a decision made; instead we are left arguing about what the evidence means, if it even is relevant.

No one wants a trial. She said she did, but that was just bluster.

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


Sorry to say most people and law enforcement agencies have not ruled them out. That is because the very DNA that cleard them may be artifact. Being highly degraded means that the DNA is older than the blood it co mingled with. In otherwords may not be the murderers DNA at all. Only Smit Augustin and Grey put forth the statements that BPD has the complete profile and that the DNA under her nails matched the DNA on the panty. DA Lacey even had that explained in great detail at the press conference. I provided that link yesterday. The transcript of the press conference of DA Mary Lacey to announce the reason behind not charging John Mark Karr. I don't believe the Ramseys can totally be ruled out till there is a trial. Even Alex Hunter believed they were not innocent in this matter. He just wanted AIRTIGHT and hopefully confession. Yes I agree obviously the perp is out there and a very sick individual who needs help. That is where I draw the line. I do hope though that a special prosecutor is appointed by the new Governor of Colorado. As a taxpayer I'll even check mark to donate some bucks if they do on our taxes. Lets get this in a court then remove all doubt as to the Umbrella of suspicion. Lets see all the facts laid out in front of a jury.

Who are these "most folks" and law enforcement agencies that you speak of? Just curious.

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


No one wants a trial. She said she did, but that was just bluster.

She knew she didn't do. She wasn't afraid of a trial.

[Athena]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


Sorry to say most people and law enforcement agencies have not ruled them out. That is because the very DNA that cleard them may be artifact. Being highly degraded means that the DNA is older than the blood it co mingled with. In otherwords may not be the murderers DNA at all. Only Smit Augustin and Grey put forth the statements that BPD has the complete profile and that the DNA under her nails matched the DNA on the panty. DA Lacey even had that explained in great detail at the press conference. I provided that link yesterday. The transcript of the press conference of DA Mary Lacey to announce the reason behind not charging John Mark Karr. I don't believe the Ramseys can totally be ruled out till there is a trial. Even Alex Hunter believed they were not innocent in this matter. He just wanted AIRTIGHT and hopefully confession. Yes I agree obviously the perp is out there and a very sick individual who needs help. That is where I draw the line. I do hope though that a special prosecutor is appointed by the new Governor of Colorado. As a taxpayer I'll even check mark to donate some bucks if they do on our taxes. Lets get this in a court then remove all doubt as to the Umbrella of suspicion. Lets see all the facts laid out in front of a jury.

If the DNA is artifact then that means there are numerous suspects who would still remain other than the Ramseys. There were some whose handwriting could not be excluded and with a higher score than Patsy had. There are some who had no alibis. Some suspects could not even be found to be tested. What about the fibers that cannot be explained? If the DNA is artifact this case will never be solved. JMO

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


She knew she didn't do. She wasn't afraid of a trial.

Everyone's afraid of being on trial for murder. The prosecutor is going to do his best to put you behind bars for life - maybe even the chair.

Innocent people have been convicted of murder.

Again, it was just bluster.

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


Everyone's afraid of being on trial for murder. The prosecutor is going to do his best to put you behind bars for life - maybe even the chair.

Innocent people have been convicted of murder.

Again, it was just bluster.

And again, I don't agree. I think Patsy had lost one of the most precious things in her life. After that I don't think she feared anything - even death. JMO

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by Athena


If the DNA is artifact then that means there are numerous suspects who would still remain other than the Ramseys. There were some whose handwriting could not be excluded and with a higher score than Patsy had. There are some who had no alibis. Some suspects could not even be found to be tested. What about the fibers that cannot be explained? If the DNA is artifact this case will never be solved. JMO

If the DNA is artifact and truthfully it was highly degraded even then then this case will not be solved by DNA. It can and will one day be solved by forensic fact and evidence, I do believe that. What in the world did we ever do before DNA. Lacey will not forever be the DA. The Grand Jury didn't even do a complete job. Fact not fiction. Colorado citizens know this if others do not. Judge Carnes in Atlanta didn't even look to the investigation or evidence in the civil matter. So that was no exoneration. Look I am a passive person not given to argument so much so I don't even bother with half of it I just think newbie or misinformed to myself and go on. I have heard more misinformation and opinion regards this murder on forums stated as fact....that is not . Stuff long ago tested proven resolved and dismissed. Here is what I think. I think JMK as bogus as he was just put a crack in the dam. The little boys finger can't stop the damn from breaking forever. I think this case is going to break wide open. I could be wrong. But people are working on it again that had long ago went on in other directions. Colorado citizens are re energized and wanting answers and action. Lets not say the case may never be solved. Lets say if it is true and DNA is artifact. There is enough other evidence to decide this matter without it. Its time to do so.

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


Everyone's afraid of being on trial for murder. The prosecutor is going to do his best to put you behind bars for life - maybe even the chair.

Innocent people have been convicted of murder.

Again, it was just bluster.

You are so right. Patsy was so terrified they had prearranged to avoid being cuffed taken into custody they made preset plans to surrender discreetly . MHO She was terrified of a trial.

[sweetcharlotte]

Patsy and John talked about making arrangements to be in Boulder in the event one or both was indicted. I don't remember either of them stating they were "terrified." DOI & JMO

[Athena]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


If the DNA is artifact and truthfully it was highly degraded even then then this case will not be solved by DNA. It can and will one day be solved by forensic fact and evidence, I do believe that. What in the world did we ever do before DNA. Lacey will not forever be the DA. The Grand Jury didn't even do a complete job. Fact not fiction. Colorado citizens know this if others do not. Judge Carnes in Atlanta didn't even look to the investigation or evidence in the civil matter. So that was no exoneration. Look I am a passive person not given to argument so much so I don't even bother with half of it I just think newbie or misinformed to myself and go on. I have heard more misinformation and opinion regards this murder on forums stated as fact....that is not . Stuff long ago tested proven resolved and dismissed. Here is what I think. I think JMK as bogus as he was just put a crack in the dam. The little boys finger can't stop the damn from breaking forever. I think this case is going to break wide open. I could be wrong. But people are working on it again that had long ago went on in other directions. Colorado citizens are re energized and wanting answers and action. Lets not say the case may never be solved. Lets say if it is true and DNA is artifact. There is enough other evidence to decide this matter without it. Its time to do so.

I sincerely hope your speculation is correct about this case breaking wide open -- but there is no more evidence against the Ramseys than there was 10 years ago. According to PM/PT the more they investigated the case, the less they came up with against them. The only reason the BPD wanted them to be arrested for probable cause was because they believed if Patsy were in jail for one day - it would make her confess.

If they had enough forensic evidence the Ramseys would have been arrested and indicted. There is no concrete evidence against them. Fibers are the easiest things to be defended not counting the fibers where no source has been identified. Handwriting - lol - Patsy scored 4.5 out of 5 that she was not the author of that note. Even the handwriting charges had to be dropped against McVeigh and he was definitely guilty. If no DNA - no case. JMO

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


Who are these "most folks" and law enforcement agencies that you speak of? Just curious.

Definition of most folks. Just near anyone you'd talk to in Boulder Valley unless the only one who ever speaks a word around here is RDI's and IDI's have lock jaw. Bill O Reilly would term them "the folks" People just your average Dick and jane next door even strangers in restaurants. If you wanted the opinion of the Boulder Valley be at the Restaurants right after the John Mark Karr thing broke no one I mean not one opinion you heard from the folks thought he'd be charged. Cause they already knew in their hearts and mind who was responsible.

Definition of Law Enforcement. Only the DA office is in charge of the case of JonBenet's murder and so that would be the who that would be that will remove them from suspicion or out from that ole Parasol of Persecution .... DA Lacey herself will not be as bold about her feelings of guilt or innocence. She hedges and tries not to answer. She also knows the evidence in the case. I think she personally hesitates cause she got to know the Ramseys a little bit working on the JMK thing. Hunter admitted it many did....but well you see where airtight and confession Hunter left the case. Keenan.... didn't have that big a role. Lacey. Might just have escaped unscathed but for JMK. She even attended Patsy Ramseys funeral. Hows that for objectivity. However her office will not remove them from suspicion. Again that lends to the appearances of the DA who will not prosecute. Whose investigators just can't find another path of enlightenment to follow. Or so that is what the folks say round here. I am still waiting for the court to make judgement. However having said that it changes not one whit of the facts and truth of the case. I am content in letting a jury decide. I think the only way to decide it would be to wade through the volumes of information and evidence. Not chat on a forum. As much as I am fond of a few of you already.

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by Athena


I sincerely hope your speculation is correct about this case breaking wide open -- but there is no more evidence against the Ramseys than there was 10 years ago. According to PM/PT the more they investigated the case, the less they came up with against them. The only reason the BPD wanted them to be arrested for probable cause was because they believed if Patsy were in jail for one day - it would make her confess.

If they had enough forensic evidence the Ramseys would have been arrested and indited. There is no concrete evidence against them. Fibers are the easiest things to be defended not counting the fibers where no source has been identified. Handwriting - lol - Patsy scored 4.5 out of 5 that she was not the author of that note. Even the handwriting charges had to be dropped against McVeigh and he was definitely guilty. If no DNA - no case. JMO

Dosen't that pretty much mean that handwritting analysis isn't very accurate ? And in turn, doesn't that mean that those who think PR didn't write the RN could well be wrong ?

[Athena]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


Dosen't that pretty much mean that handwritting analysis isn't very accurate ? And in turn, doesn't that mean that those who think PR didn't write the RN could well be wrong ?

Of course anyone can be wrong. But there were others who scored far lower than Patsy such as Wolf, Merrick, Meyers and Henderson and those are just the ones I remember from the top of my head. A package was also sent to Lin Wood on White's handwriting done by a criminologist in the UK but because White's interviews are sealed don't know whatever happened to it but it is evidence. And the criminologist had to remove what he wrote about White from his website. JMHO

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by Athena


Of course anyone can be wrong. But there were others who scored far lower than Patsy such as Wolf, Merrick, Meyers and Henderson and those are just the ones I remember from the top of my head. A package was also sent to Lin Wood on White's handwriting done by a criminologist in the UK but because White's interviews are sealed don't know whatever happened to it but it is evidence. And the criminologist had to remove what he wrote about White from his website. JMHO

But your point was that they couldn't even get McVeigh's handwriting correct - and we know he's guilty.

It seems very likely that they didn't get this one right either - but came close, in the sense that PR wasn't eliminated as the author.

[Athena]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


But your point was that they couldn't even get McVeigh's handwriting correct - and we know he's guilty.

The point is noone is going to be arrested in this case based on their handwriting. JMO

[shill]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


She even attended Patsy Ramseys funeral. Hows that for objectivity. Sounds like the action of a respectful caring woman.

[nuisanceposter]

Originally posted by shill
Sounds like the action of a respectful caring woman.

And like the actions of another Ramsey-friendly DA. How many district attorneys take the time and spend their own money to attend the funeral of a woman who is a suspect in her daughter's murder?

It might be a respectful and caring gesture, but it is hardly the behavior of an objective DA. You don't cater to personal emotions when you're a professional, especially in a legal capacity when you're being watched on a national scale.

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by shill
Sounds like the action of a respectful caring woman.

Or a DA who wanted to see who/what she could see?

[LindaA]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


Or a DA who wanted to see who/what she could see?

I know LE do this often at funerals. I wonder if that wasn't the case here.

But if DA LACy had been working with the Ramseys re: JMK, it doesn't sound as if she suspected them.

[Ames]

Originally posted by shill
Funny how people who explain why JB was still in the house have said the Ramseys didn't get rid of the body because they couldn't bare to put their beloved daughter alone out in the cold and yet others have no problem theorizing the Ramseys were willing to stuff her in a suitcase and dump her from a plane in Lake Michigan. Two widely different interpretations of how the Ramseys would behave if guilty.
Maybe the suitcase has nothing to do with anything and maybe a intruder could have entered another way other then the basement window.

I believe that John had no problem with wanting to dump the body out in the cold...but, it was Patsy that couldn't stand the thoughts of it. I am the one that said that he COULD HAVE POSSIBLY (not that he DID) thought about putting JB in the suitcase, and disposing of her body in Lake Michigan. Its just something that I thought of...it doesn't mean that I actually think that he DID do that. I was just stating WHAT IF'S. And you are right, the suitcase may have nothing at all to do with this case.

[Ames]

And yet again...I didn't make it back in time to edit....

I also want to add ....that all IDI's do not share the same opinion, either. They can't all decide on whether it was an ex-co-worker of Johns, someone that he had business dealings with, Fleet White, one of Burke's friends, a sexual perv from off the street, etc. Not all RDI's share the same exact ideas, Shill...we just know that a RDI. All IDI's do not share the same ideas...they just know that an IDI. IMO

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by shill
Sounds like the action of a respectful caring woman.

However one that clearly crossed the lines of conflict of interest. We the people of the state of Colorado did elect an appoint her to do a job. Not to schmooze, become friends or fraternize with suspects. It didn't set well out here. Probably less well actually than the JMK fiasco. Its appearances while all warm and fuzzy are exactly what we had against Hunter and Keenan. We have real issues if the case will ever be prosecuted till the Hunter era legacy has run its course.

[Coloradokares]

I thought I'd let you know there will be on the fox channel I think regular FOX cause its channel 31 out here not 360 which is our fox news. A special with Julie Hayden. I think its Monday night. I am for sure going to check my Direct TV program listings for this. Julie Hayden worked at the ABC channel 7 as an investigative reporter and was active in reporting on the JonBenet murder from day one. I know Julie has been working very hard on this. She was also brought in during breaks in the case and during the JMK situation.

[shill]

Originally posted by Ames
And yet again...I didn't make it back in time to edit....

I also want to add ....that all IDI's do not share the same opinion, either. They can't all decide on whether it was an ex-co-worker of Johns, someone that he had business dealings with, Fleet White, one of Burke's friends, a sexual perv from off the street, etc. Not all RDI's share the same exact ideas, Shill...we just know that a RDI. All IDI's do not share the same ideas...they just know that an IDI. IMO By RDI, I'm assuming you mean the 3 in the house. As far as IDI, there are 100's of suspects, of which a dozen sound like they should be locked up anyways, even if they haven't done anything. IMO at least 5-6 that are capable of commiting a crime at this level. And I don't rule out Andrew. Except for his strong alibi, he'd be near the top of my list.

So all the IDI's share the same opinion that there are a lot of people that make better suspects then the Ramseys.

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte
Patsy and John talked about making arrangements to be in Boulder in the event one or both was indicted. I don't remember either of them stating they were "terrified." DOI & JMO

Put yourself in their shoes. They would go on trial for the murder of their daughter. A fight for their lives, they were very uncomfortable with that notion. Would you be. Its not a good day when you are on trial for your life when your daughters found dead in your basement and you were the only ones known to be home at the time. And no intruder has been found to stand trial yet. It is a reasonable concern to have.

[shill]

Originally posted by nuisanceposter


And like the actions of another Ramsey-friendly DA. How many district attorneys take the time and spend their own money to attend the funeral of a woman who is a suspect in her daughter's murder?

It might be a respectful and caring gesture, but it is hardly the behavior of an objective DA. You don't cater to personal emotions when you're a professional, especially in a legal capacity when you're being watched on a national scale. They're professionals. What happens in the courtroom, stays in the courtroom. Even the jurors are told this over and over.
You are some heartless uncaring people.
You have never experienced a normal childhood and have hate for people better off then you.
It's sad your lifes are so miserable that you can't see that people care for others and love their children.
I don't know what happened in your lifes to make you so bitter, but I feel sorry for you people.

[LindaA]

Originally posted by Ames
And yet again...I didn't make it back in time to edit....

I also want to add ....that all IDI's do not share the same opinion, either. They can't all decide on whether it was an ex-co-worker of Johns, someone that he had business dealings with, Fleet White, one of Burke's friends, a sexual perv from off the street, etc. Not all RDI's share the same exact ideas, Shill...we just know that a RDI. All IDI's do not share the same ideas...they just know that an IDI. IMO

Right. But the IDIs have so many more to pick from. The RDIs have only 3 if you count Burke. It seems to me you should have an easier time of it with such limited options.

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by LindaA


I know LE do this often at funerals. I wonder if that wasn't the case here.

<snip>



Yes, and so do perpetrators sometimes.

[Ames]

Originally posted by LindaA


Right. But the IDIs have so many more to pick from. The RDIs have only 3 if you count Burke. It seems to me you should have an easier time of it with such limited options.

Yes, the RDI folks do have an easier time of it. As far as I know, all but one RDI poster, believes that BOTH parents were involved. So, yes...its a pretty easy conclusion for us. I would hate to be IDI and not be able to decide WHO I think that intruder might have been....Fleet White? NO. An ex-co-worker of John's? NO. A sexual pervert from off the street? NO. A college student? NO. A friend of Burke's? NO. Someone that John had business dealings with? NO. I DO see what you are saying though, Linda...that an intruder could have been anybody...and its hard to pinpoint just who that intruder could have been. That's why I am glad that I am RDI...less choices to choose from. If I thought that an intruder did it, and I couldn't figure out who that intruder could have been...that would drive me crazy!! IMO

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by Ames


<snip>

That's why I am glad that I am RDI...less choices to choose from. If I thought that an intruder did it, and I couldn't figure out who that intruder could have been...that would drive me crazy!! IMO

By all means - make it easy on yourself. Don't worry about justice, let's just concentrate on putting someone - ANYONE - in jail, whether they did it or not.

JMO

[Ames]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


By all means - make it easy on yourself. Don't worry about justice, let's just concentrate on putting someone - ANYONE - in jail, whether they did it or not.

JMO

Oh good grief Sweet....I don't think that its the Ramsey's just because that makes it easier for me. Thats ridiculous! I have ALWAYS...from day ONE...thought that the Ramsey's did it...and not because that was the easiest conclusion. I would love to see justice done for JB, just like you would. I think that justice for her, is the only thing that the RDI's and IDI's can agree on....and that is good enough for me.

[lucky13]

Originally posted by shill

You are some heartless uncaring people.
You have never experienced a normal childhood and have hate for people better off then you.
It's sad your lifes are so miserable that you can't see that people care for others and love their children.
I don't know what happened in your lifes to make you so bitter, but I feel sorry for you people.

Wow. I feel sorry for YOU. Those comments were uncalled for.
Get a grip...

[Ames]

Originally posted by lucky13


Wow. I feel sorry for YOU. Those comments were uncalled for.
Get a grip...

Totally uncalled for! I especially like the way that Shill thinks that he (or she) knows all of the RDI folk.

Quote from shill:

"You are some heartless uncaring people.
You have never experienced a normal childhood and have hate for people better off then you.
It's sad your lifes are so miserable that you can't see that people care for others and love their children.
I don't know what happened in your lifes to make you so bitter, but I feel sorry for you people."

So we think that the Ramseys are guilty because....we are "uncaring", didn't have a "normal childhood", poor and have "hate for people better off than us" (some of us on this board have more money than the Ramseys!), we lead "miserable lives", and we are "bitter". Oh good GRIEF! NO...we are RDI because the Ramsey's were the only people in the house the night of the murder, and there is no evidence of an intruder...its as simple as that. IMO

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


Put yourself in their shoes. They would go on trial for the murder of their daughter. A fight for their lives, they were very uncomfortable with that notion. Would you be. Its not a good day when you are on trial for your life when your daughters found dead in your basement and you were the only ones known to be home at the time. And no intruder has been found to stand trial yet. It is a reasonable concern to have.

They would go to trial? Both? What would be the evidence used against John? Against Patsy? Or against both?

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by Ames


Yes, the RDI folks do have an easier time of it. As far as I know, all but one RDI poster, believes that BOTH parents were involved. So, yes...its a pretty easy conclusion for us. I would hate to be IDI and not be able to decide WHO I think that intruder might have been....Fleet White? NO. An ex-co-worker of John's? NO. A sexual pervert from off the street? NO. A college student? NO. A friend of Burke's? NO. Someone that John had business dealings with? NO. I DO see what you are saying though, Linda...that an intruder could have been anybody...and its hard to pinpoint just who that intruder could have been. That's why I am glad that I am RDI...less choices to choose from. If I thought that an intruder did it, and I couldn't figure out who that intruder could have been...that would drive me crazy!! IMO

I thought the IDIs had pretty much agreed it was a Paedophile/burglar turned kidnapper, who hated rich people, and may have had dealings with JR.

:confused:

[shill]

Originally posted by Ames


Totally uncalled for! I especially like the way that Shill thinks that he (or she) knows all of the RDI folk.

Quote from shill:

"You are some heartless uncaring people.
You have never experienced a normal childhood and have hate for people better off then you.
It's sad your lifes are so miserable that you can't see that people care for others and love their children.
I don't know what happened in your lifes to make you so bitter, but I feel sorry for you people."

So we think that the Ramseys are guilty because....we are "uncaring", didn't have a "normal childhood", poor and have "hate for people better off than us" (some of us on this board have more money than the Ramseys!), we lead "miserable lives", and we are "bitter". Oh good GRIEF! NO...we are RDI because the Ramsey's were the only people in the house the night of the murder, and there is no evidence of an intruder...its as simple as that. IMO I didn't say that because you think the Ramseys did it. I said it based on the beliefs that have been expressed in your comments and what they reveal.

Richer than the Ramseys were? Didn't know we had millionaires posting here.
Do I need to add liers to the list?

[Ames]

Originally posted by shill
I didn't say that because you think the Ramseys did it. I said it based on the beliefs that have been expressed in your comments and what they reveal.

Richer than the Ramseys were? Didn't know we had millionaires posting here.
Do I need to add liers to the list?

First of all..you have NO idea IF any of the people on this board are millionaires or NOT...now do you? Just like we don't know how much YOU are worth...you don't have a clue how much each of the other posters are worth. And YOU are the one lying, if you say that you DO know. I, for one, don't see how a millionaire posting here, is such an absurd notion.

Just because we are RDI...that does not mean that we are uncaring. We DO CARE....but, we believe that the Ramsey's killed their daughter. So, the person that we care most about, is JB....not her parents. She is the one that is in the ground...and has not had justice served. I do not see how she could ever, truly rest in peace...until an arrest is made in her case, and her killer is behind bars.

[shill]

Originally posted by Ames


First of all..you have NO idea IF any of the people on this board are millionaires or NOT...now do you? Just like we don't know how much YOU are worth...you don't have a clue how much each of the other posters are worth. And YOU are the one lying, if you say that you DO know. I, for one, don't see how a millionaire posting here, is such an absurd notion.

Just because we are RDI...that does not mean that we are uncaring. We DO CARE....but, we believe that the Ramsey's killed their daughter. So, the person that we care most about, is JB....not her parents. She is the one that is in the ground...and has not had justice served. I do not see how she could ever, truly rest in peace...until an arrest is made in her case, and her killer is behind bars. What makes you think JB wants her parents to pay for this crime? From what I read she loved her parents, and IMO she would forgive them and move on, not put them on trial to rot to death in prison.
What is this justice you RDIs think JB will get by her parents suffering even more.
Christianity teaches love and forgiveness. You could learn something from it.

Ya, you're real caring folks!

[Ames]

Originally posted by shill
What makes you think JB wants her parents to pay for this crime? From what I read she loved her parents, and IMO she would forgive them and move on, not put them on trial to rot to death in prison.
What is this justice you RDIs think JB will get by her parents suffering.
Christianity teaches love and forgiveness.
Ya, your real caring folks!

Okay, you are saying that JB would NOT want her parents to pay for their crime?? HUH??? I KNOW that she loved her parents...I am not disputing that fact. I do not for one second, though...think that she would "forgive them and move on". They KILLED her...why would she want them to not pay for their crime? Its ALMOST the same as these parents that turn in their kids, for something that they did. They LOVE them...BUT...they need to pay for their crime. I have also heard of children turning their parents in for things, too. That doesn't mean that they don't love them...but, it does mean that they don't think that their parents should get away with the crime, either. IF they DID kill her ...then they NEED to suffer...but jail would not be near the suffering that JB went through. Yes, I am a Christian...and I do know that it teaches love and forgiveness, but I believe that God would not want the parents to go unpunished if they killed their daughter. What ever happened to an eye for an eye...a tooth for a tooth?? We DO care about JB...thats why we want justice for her. IMO

[bullmoose]

I think little Jonbenet is resting in peace, no matter what happens in the justice system. I do not personally think that anyone who posts here, RDI or IDI, is unfeeling or uncaring. We certainly differ in our opinions, but we all would like justice for her.I come here to read and post, to try to better understand the case, although I'm an IDI. Only the killer or killers truly know exactly what happened and why it happened; it doesn't matter what side we believe to be the correct one, all we are doing is speculation here.

[Ames]

Originally posted by bullmoose
I think little Jonbenet is resting in peace, no matter what happens in the justice system. I do not personally think that anyone who posts here, RDI or IDI, is unfeeling or uncaring. We certainly differ in our opinions, but we all would like justice for her.I come here to read and post, to try to better understand the case, although I'm an IDI. Only the killer or killers truly know exactly what happened and why it happened; it doesn't matter what side we believe to be the correct one, all we are doing is speculation here.

Great post! I agree completely!!!!!

[Ames]

Ignore this...

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by Ames
Ignore this...

lol - ignore what?

[Ames]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


lol - ignore what?


LOL...I was trying to edit something that I had written in a previous post, but I clicked on the wrong thing by mistake. It took me to a reply to message screen, and wouldn't let me leave until I typed something (it was holding me hostage! LOL)....so, I wrote "Ignore this"...so that I could leave.

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


They would go to trial? Both? What would be the evidence used against John? Against Patsy? Or against both?

The first piece of evidence would be JonBenet's corpse then on from that point the autopsy evidence on from that point the warehouse full of evidence they maintain to this day. Intruder evidence has to the satisfaction of many been discredited without an intruder yet. You of course can steadfastly and staunchly deny that should the matter conclude in a courtroom that none of that warehouse of evidence would point in their direction. Then why in DOI did John even say he knew they were in a fight for their very lives . I was an IDI for a very long time. Unpopular postion to hold here where I live. But one I held . Why I just couldn't believe a loving parent could do what was done to JonBenet not possible. However I always was willing to at least consider and to hear the evidence that the Ramseys had staged a coverup. I was unconvinced of that until I really started listening to IDI's deny the very existence of the evidence that indeed does exist. I was unconvinced till I really examined the fact that the only test results that cleared them were ones they paid for . The more I dug deeper the more I realized you can't just choose a side and snap your teeth down on a bone and hang on for dear life. You have to consider everything. And negate that evidence exists. It does exist. As I said I am not sure anymore there is a category to stick me in. Well maybe as one really ticked off Colorado taxpayer who thinks JonBenet at least deserved to have the evidence seen in a court of law. To say there was no evidence to see or put forth is pure magical thinking. IMHO. I don't want to hear the rumor and denial of evidence. I want it seen presented in a court of law and a jury of peers to decide what the evidence proves or does not prove. Its the least we owe JonBenet. I was told the main reason Hunter didn't try it was really quite simple it was not lack of evidence it was Patsy could not be compelled to testify against John. John could not be compelled to testify against Patsy. No airtight case No confession.....Match Point. Game over till airtight becomes possilbe. We have yet to have a DA who was willing to risk their politcal position on less. So its airtightcase or a confession. That infuriates me cause they did in fact clear 600 other individuals investigated. Obscene is what it is. Obscene. But that is my opinion. Get the special proscutors appointed lets get the evidence in a courtroom and present it. Not just rehash it on the internet day after day without the keys to the warehouse. or 44,000 pages of reports. Lets get this cold case done and over with.

[shill]

Originally posted by Ames


What ever happened to an eye for an eye...a tooth for a tooth?? That's the Old Testament, before Jesus came along. The New Testament teaches turn the other cheek. You said you were a Christian, not Jewish.

If you believe Patsy lost it an accidently killed JB, then you should absolutely forgive Patsy and I see no reason why JB would want her to suffer for that.
If John killed her to cover that he was molesting her, it would show he didn't love JB and she probably wouldn't forgive him, and you would be right that he needs to pay for his crime.

It is said that the greatest lost anyone could suffer, is that of a parent loosing a child.

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


snip>


Get the special proscutors appointed lets get the evidence in a courtroom and present it. Not just rehash it on the internet day after day without the keys to the warehouse. or 44,000 pages of reports. Lets get this cold case done and over with.

Don't you have to get a grand jury to indict before you can go to a courtroom?

Name one piece of evidence today that they did not have 1997/1998 that would convince a grand jury to indict.

Also, aren't DAs elected officials? How did Lacey get elected if so many people are against her?

[shill]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


As I said I am not sure anymore there is a category to stick me in.

Oh ya, there's a category for you!

[Ames]

Originally posted by shill
That's the Old Testament, before Jesus came along. The New Testament teaches turn the other cheek. You said you were a Christian, not Jewish.

If you believe Patsy lost it an accidently killed JB, then you should absolutely forgive Patsy and I see no reason why JB would want her to suffer for that.
If John killed her to cover that he was molesting her, it would show he didn't love JB and she probably wouldn't forgive him, and you would be right that he needs to pay for his crime.

It is said that the greatest lost anyone could suffer, is that of a parent loosing a child.


LOL...yes, I am Christian...and not Jewish. I still believe that God condones punishment...or there would not be a HELL..(which I do believe in). I know that the bible teaches forgiveness....and I am sure that JB MAY possibly forgive her parents....if they are guilty....BUT...I don't think that she would want them to go unpunished. Who's to say what she would want and what she would NOT want, though? I cannot speak for her...but, I would think that she would want justice to be served....whether it be an intruder OR her parents. IMO I agree that the greatest loss that anyone could suffer, is that of a parent losing a child....BUT...what if the parents were the ones that caused the loss in the first place? The reason that I believe that Patsy should be jailed, IF she were still living...is because of the cover up. You said that I should forgive Patsy, if it was an accidental death....and I AGREE with you. BUT...my theory is..it was an accidental death turned coverup....and that would take alot more for me to forgive. It is not my place to judge, and my theory could be wrong...and YES...I would feel bad about all the things that I have posted here about the Ramseys. BUT, if they are guilty...then they deserve everything that is said about them....and more. And yes, IMO...they would deserve prison....Patsy too, if she were still with us. I didn't say that they should be put to death...so see...I DO have a little bit of empathy for them. But, IF they did it...they need to pay for their crimes. IMO

[Ames]

Originally posted by shill


Oh ya, there's a category for you!

Shill...I am still trying to figure you out. You talk about the bible and forgiveness...and even know that Jesus came along in the New Testament....BUT...you continue to take little jabs at posters that you don't agree with. Sometimes I think you are joking...but, you never use the smilies....so its hard to tell.

[bullmoose]

I can understand CK's frustration at the lack of resolution in this case; but the only courtroom that any conviction is likely to come from is the one that the BPD and Twisting Thomas with the help of their tabloid buddies convened: the court of public opinion. In that one the Ramseys were long ago codemned; I remember seeing the headline on one when Patsy died, claiming she had made a deathbed confession to Jonbenet's murder, although I also read that she was in fact in a coma for several weeks before her death. Somebody said the other day that the case would probably been resolved had it happened in Denver, where there are competant murder investigaters; but it didn't, and the offered help was refused. Swollen heads in the BPD were the problem then; I think that the lack of any new evidence is the problem now. As for the argument that Hunter didn't move because John and Patsy couldn't be compelled to testify against each other; I have never heard anything ever to convince me in the least that there was ever anything to try to compel them to testify about. Neither one ever cast any aspertions upon the other, so its just silly to think thats why the trial never occurred. It didn't occur because of a lack of a viable, convictable suspect; if John, Patsy, Fleet or whoever had been triable, they would have been tried.

[Ames]

Originally posted by bullmoose
I can understand CK's frustration at the lack of resolution in this case; but the only courtroom that any conviction is likely to come from is the one that the BPD and Twisting Thomas with the help of their tabloid buddies convened: the court of public opinion. In that one the Ramseys were long ago codemned; I remember seeing the headline on one when Patsy died, claiming she had made a deathbed confession to Jonbenet's murder, although I also read that she was in fact in a coma for several weeks before her death. Somebody said the other day that the case would probably been resolved had it happened in Denver, where there are competant murder investigaters; but it didn't, and the offered help was refused. Swollen heads in the BPD were the problem then; I think that the lack of any new evidence is the problem now. As for the argument that Hunter didn't move because John and Patsy couldn't be compelled to testify against each other; I have never heard anything ever to convince me in the least that there was ever anything to try to compel them to testify about. Neither one ever cast any aspertions upon the other, so its just silly to think thats why the trial never occurred. It didn't occur because of a lack of a viable, convictable suspect; if John, Patsy, Fleet or whoever had been triable, they would have been tried.

But, Grand Jurys can be biased too, just like a Courtroom trial jury can be. Think....OJ Simpson....remember him? Oh yeah, right....now HE was "innocent".

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by Ames


But, Grand Jurys can be biased too, just like a Courtroom trial jury can be. Think....OJ Simpson....remember him? Oh yeah, right....now HE was "innocent".

What? The only responsibility of a grand jury is to decide if there is enough evidence to convict. Big different in their responsibility and that of a jury.

JMO

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by shill
That's the Old Testament, before Jesus came along. The New Testament teaches turn the other cheek. You said you were a Christian, not Jewish.

If you believe Patsy lost it an accidently killed JB, then you should absolutely forgive Patsy and I see no reason why JB would want her to suffer for that.
If John killed her to cover that he was molesting her, it would show he didn't love JB and she probably wouldn't forgive him, and you would be right that he needs to pay for his crime.

It is said that the greatest lost anyone could suffer, is that of a parent loosing a child.

Did Patsy ask for forgiveness? I use this figuratively because you chose Patsy's name by way of your example. You know we are all held accountable for our actions towards others Christian or not. This is not revenge or even judgement of another. We are a nation of laws. We cannot allow murder to take place without accountibility or penalty of any kind. A total breakdown of society would be inevitable. Don't like someone kill them who cares no harm no foul. The difference regarding Christianity and forgiveness is the act of salvation through the provision of Christs death and ressurection he died in our place on the cross for our sins. Christianity is based upon provision for our personal acceptance of Christs provision for our salvation. Lets move past that for a moment. We are a society who has laws. Murder is not condoned and has penalty regardless of the condition of ones forgiveness through eternal salvation. When laws are broken. There is an accountibility and penalty for those crimes. Forgiveness would be between God and Patsy or John or this unknown intruder. That however does not cancel out or make moot accoutibility nor pay the penalty for those crimes before our court and justice being served here . Let me give you a hypothetical. Lets say John since he is still alive and its possible for him to come before the nation or even one individual and say I am sorry forgive me. Then that is repentance and a turning from and acknowledging of that wrong doing . We then still have laws but perhaps then mercy could and should be applied in the penalty for that wrong doing. Christ forgives the sin and provides forgiveness for sin and eternal life but that does not erase the accountibility nor the penalty that society imposes for those who would take another life. One is temporal the other eternal. That is why judgement in a court should be always be tempered with mercy where remorse has been shown and a willingness to accept accountibility has been show. However without admission or repentance there can be no mercy here on earth or eternally. Repentance is a condition. That is between the murderer and Christ alone. One must acknowledge what they have done and seek forgiveness. I apologize to anyone on this list who would be offended but forgiveness is not automatic. I am not speaking against the tenets of any other faith. I am explaining Christianity. As I know it to be through my bible and my faith. The thief on the cross who acknowledged and confessed was yet that day with Christ in Paradise. The one who did not and ridiculed would not. The penalty on earth was the same for both. They paid their debt for their crimes here on earth. I hope that explains. I do apologize if this offended anyone. Please feel free to explain it from any other belief or faith. I will gladly listen. I most certainly am eager to forgive. For those who are forgiven much, much is required.

[Ames]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


What? The only responsibility of a grand jury is to decide if there is enough evidence to convict. Big different in their responsibility and that of a jury.

JMO

No, I know how they work...my husband (a government agent) has had to testify at them before. I know that all of the members of the grand jury get to ask questions, to the person that is testifying. All that I am saying is that it IS possible for the GJ to have been biased...therefore, deciding there wasn't enough evidence to convict (when in reality, there could have been). IMO

[Ames]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


Did Patsy ask for forgiveness? I use this figuratively because you chose Patsy's name by way of your example. You know we are all held accountable for our actions towards others Christian or not. This is not revenge or even judgement of another. We are a nation of laws. We cannot allow murder to take place without accountibility or penalty of any kind. A total breakdown of society would be inevitable. Don't like someone kill them who cares no harm no foul. The difference regarding Christianity and forgiveness is the act of salvation through the provision of Christs death and ressurection he died in our place on the cross for our sins. Christianity is based upon provision for our personal acceptance of Christs provision for our salvation. Lets move past that for a moment. We are a society who has laws. Murder is not condoned and has penalty regardless of the condition of ones forgiveness through eternal salvation. When laws are broken. There is an accountibility and penalty for those crimes. Forgiveness would be between God and Patsy or John or this unknown intruder. That however does not cancel out or make moot accoutibility nor pay the penalty for those crimes before our court and justice being served here . Let me give you a hypothetical. Lets say John since he is still alive and its possible for him to come before the nation or even one individual and say I am sorry forgive me. Then that is repentance and a turning from and acknowledging of that wrong doing . We then still have laws but perhaps then mercy could and should be applied in the penalty for that wrong doing. Christ forgives the sin and provides forgiveness for sin and eternal life but that does not erase the accountibility nor the penalty that society imposes for those who would take another life. One is temporal the other eternal. That is why judgement in a court should be always be tempered with mercy where remorse has been shown and a willingness to accept accountibility has been show. However without admission or repentance there can be no mercy here on earth or eternally. Repentance is a condition. That is between the murderer and Christ alone. One must acknowledge what they have done and seek forgiveness. I apologize to anyone on this list who would be offended but forgiveness is not automatic. I am not speaking against the tenets of any other faith. I am explaining Christianity. As I know it to be through my bible and my faith. The thief on the cross who acknowledged and confessed was yet that day with Christ in Paradise. The one who did not and ridiculed would not. The penalty on earth was the same for both. They paid their debt for their crimes here on earth. I hope that explains. I do apologize if this offended anyone. Please feel free to explain it from any other belief or faith. I will gladly listen. I most certainly am eager to forgive. For those who are forgiven much, much is required.


WOW...very well said. You put into ALOT better words, what I was TRYING to say. You just did a better job of it...LOL

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by Ames


No, I know how they work...my husband (a government agent) has had to testify at them before. I know that all of the members of the grand jury get to ask questions, to the person that is testifying. All that I am saying is that it IS possible for the GJ to have been biased...therefore, deciding there wasn't enough evidence to convict (when in reality, there could have been). IMO

Yes, Ames, I am very familiar with how a gj works having served on one for two weeks and deciding on more than 10 cases which were obviously not as complicated as this case. If is highly unlikely that the people serving on the Ramsey GJ were influenced by anything other than the evidence presented......and I think it does disservice to these individuals who gave 13 months out of their lives to this service to question their motives/ethics/honesty.


I am also familiar with what a jury does. I have served on four.

JMO

[Ames]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


Yes, Ames, I am very familiar with how a gj works having served on one for two weeks and deciding on more than 10 cases which were obviously not as complicated as this case. If is highly unlikely that the people serving on the Ramsey GJ were influenced by anything other than the evidence presented......and I think it does disservice to these individuals who gave 13 months out of their lives to this service to question their motives/ethics/honesty.


I am also familiar with what a jury does. I have served on four.

JMO

Not sure if a grand jury, and a Federal Grand Jury are the same though. Do you know?

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by bullmoose
I can understand CK's frustration at the lack of resolution in this case; but the only courtroom that any conviction is likely to come from is the one that the BPD and Twisting Thomas with the help of their tabloid buddies convened: the court of public opinion. In that one the Ramseys were long ago codemned; I remember seeing the headline on one when Patsy died, claiming she had made a deathbed confession to Jonbenet's murder, although I also read that she was in fact in a coma for several weeks before her death. Somebody said the other day that the case would probably been resolved had it happened in Denver, where there are competant murder investigaters; but it didn't, and the offered help was refused. Swollen heads in the BPD were the problem then; I think that the lack of any new evidence is the problem now. As for the argument that Hunter didn't move because John and Patsy couldn't be compelled to testify against each other; I have never heard anything ever to convince me in the least that there was ever anything to try to compel them to testify about. Neither one ever cast any aspertions upon the other, so its just silly to think thats why the trial never occurred. It didn't occur because of a lack of a viable, convictable suspect; if John, Patsy, Fleet or whoever had been triable, they would have been tried.

I totally respect your opinion and your right to it. I wish, I want so much to share openly and feel due to my high priority on personal relationships things that I know and I know have to be truth because I know their standard of integrity and their decency and their honesty. I know they would not lie. I do not know Steve Thomas. Just to clarify that any smears you would hurl towards him are not personal to me. But I do not feel that it would be a kangaroo hanging court without compelling evidence that would be presented. Unless you are only one of a handfull you probably don't know the private issues of John or Patsy Ramsey. None of us may ever know that concretely. I certainly dont. It is not silly it is fact that was a huge part of DA Alex Hunters decision. It was mostly politically motivated. He wanted a confession and airtight. You have two choices you believe it or you don't. You can feel Steve Thomas twisted and lied but it does not appear that is so. His track record is there for scrutiny. So is the track record of DA Hunter. Many careers were sacrificed in this case. Not just Steve Thomas' You are entitled to your opinion. However I am not compelled to discount the personal beliefs I have, but based more on the relationship and trust I have with people I know who were in a postion to know more than I ever could. My friends feel there is no way the Ramseys could have done this. However I cannot discount where investigating the truth of the evidence led others to believe otherwise either. :shrug: So that is why I am personally so willing to let a jury of peers decide the matter. :seeya:

[Ames]

Originally posted by Ames


Not sure if a grand jury, and a Federal Grand Jury are the same though. Do you know?

I again, did not make it back in time to edit...I need to be quicker.

What I was asking in the post above is....because the FBI was not involved...was it STLL a Federal case? The GJ that my husband testified at, were all Federal cases...so, they may be done differently. I don't know...he isn't here, or I would ask him.

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by Ames


Not sure if a grand jury, and a Federal Grand Jury are the same though. Do you know?

http://campus.udayton.edu/~grandjur/stategj/stateg.htm

[Ames]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


Yes, Ames, I am very familiar with how a gj works having served on one for two weeks and deciding on more than 10 cases which were obviously not as complicated as this case. If is highly unlikely that the people serving on the Ramsey GJ were influenced by anything other than the evidence presented......and I think it does disservice to these individuals who gave 13 months out of their lives to this service to question their motives/ethics/honesty.


I am also familiar with what a jury does. I have served on four.

JMO

How many GJ have you served, did it involve a future political office contender?? John ran for some political office later on....I would say that he knew a few "higher ups". This was not your normal GJ case. IMO

[Ames]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


http://campus.udayton.edu/~grandjur/stategj/stateg.htm


Thanks, my husband isn't here...or I would have asked him.

So, I assume that in JB's case, it was a State GJ.....I wasn't quite clear on that at first.

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by Ames


How many GJ have you served, did it involve a future political office contender?? John ran for some political office later on....I would say that he knew a few "higher ups". This was not your normal GJ case. IMO

Ames, what are you talking about? Do you think in 1997/1998 anyone knew that in 2004 John Ramsey would be running for a political office in another state?

People with money - such a John Ramsey - on the one hand have an advantage, i.e., they can hire the best attorneys, media consultants, they are better equipped to present themselves in a favorable light. However, this does not always work to their advantage as indicated here on the board by people who have this thing about "people with money." Some people let that influence the decision they make.

Do the names Ken Lay, Bernie Ebbers, Richard Scrushy mean anything to you. They knew "higher ups" but little good did it do them when they went before a Grand Jury and on to trial.
This insinuation that John "knew" someone is - IMO - ridiculous.

[Ames]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


<snipped>

Ames, what are you talking about? Do you think in 1997/1998 anyone knew that in 2004 John Ramsey would be running for a political office in another state?





Yes, I know that there would have been no way for anyone to have known that he was going to run for political office. BUT...IMO...in Boulder, where things are alot different than other places, John's influence could have swayed the GJ decision. He was extremely well known there...before the murder. And I don't think its so much that he had money (so did Ken Lay, Martha Stewart...etc), but that he was well known and liked in the community. IMO

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by Ames



Yes, I know that there would have been no way for anyone to have known that he was going to run for political office. BUT...IMO...in Boulder, where things are alot different than other places, John's influence could have swayed the GJ decision. He was extremely well known there...before the murder. And I don't think its so much that he had money (so did Ken Lay, Martha Stewart...etc), but that he was well known and liked in the community. IMO

Why do you think Boulder is different from other places?

(Just heard something in the background - Fox News - Bill O'R - something about Lacey being on later.)

[Athena]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


I totally respect your opinion and your right to it. I wish, I want so much to share openly and feel due to my high priority on personal relationships things that I know and I know have to be truth because I know their standard of integrity and their decency and their honesty. I know they would not lie. I do not know Steve Thomas. Just to clarify that any smears you would hurl towards him are not personal to me. But I do not feel that it would be a kangaroo hanging court without compelling evidence that would be presented. Unless you are only one of a handfull you probably don't know the private issues of John or Patsy Ramsey. None of us may ever know that concretely. I certainly dont. It is not silly it is fact that was a huge part of DA Alex Hunters decision. It was mostly politically motivated. He wanted a confession and airtight. You have two choices you believe it or you don't. You can feel Steve Thomas twisted and lied but it does not appear that is so. His track record is there for scrutiny. So is the track record of DA Hunter. Many careers were sacrificed in this case. Not just Steve Thomas' You are entitled to your opinion. However I am not compelled to discount the personal beliefs I have, but based more on the relationship and trust I have with people I know who were in a postion to know more than I ever could. My friends feel there is no way the Ramseys could have done this. However I cannot discount where investigating the truth of the evidence led others to believe otherwise either. :shrug: So that is why I am personally so willing to let a jury of peers decide the matter. :seeya:

Track record? This was Steve Thomas' first homicide case -- even Eller the Commander had NEVER directed a homicide and refused advise from everyone and anyone. The only one from what I've read that was actually familiar with procedures was Larry Mason and he and Eller knocked heads because of it because Eller needed to be the "boss". Many egos were involved here and the Denver PD even ridiculed them with t-shirts that bore a slogan that read "they do it right" (might not be exact words - but something to that effect.

After an hour and a half the investigation was announced to be completed by Eller until Hofstrom intervened and said he wanted every fiber, every footprint, every fingerprint, floorboards ripped up, drains tested, etc. If it weren't for the DA's office even less would have been forthcoming.

As soon as a kidnapping was reported the BPD should have called in the FBI and never even got involved until the FBI directed them to - up until 1PM when the body was found.

Steve Thomas twisted everything thus the name "Twisted Thomas" bullmoose gave him which I believe is quite appro-pro. All you need do is read his book and compare it to his depo. Many, many contradictions all made to fit his accidental bedwetting theory. In addition to that he was the direct leak to the media to gain exactly the public opinion that he did based on his unproven theory. Unfortunately the damage was done and alot of people still believe the old misinformation that is still out there.

One thing we all know is that you are supposed to follow the evidence to where it leads not make it fit your theory and personally most of the RDIs do exactly that -- make it fit their theories.

I am not certain the Ramseys did not do this but there is a heck of alot of evidence that points away from them. Alot of the so-called evidence that points to them is totally conjecture and speculation and does not a murderer make.

Even in PMPT Schiller specifically says the more the BPD investigated the less apparent it became that it WAS the Ramseys who did this. Whether Hunter erred in not arresting them for probable cause he certainly was correct they would have never been convicted without a reasonable doubt with the flimsy trace evidence they had.

Also been reading up on this DNA issue and the DNA was not degraded -- it was contaminated due to clipping of JBRs nails with unsterile clippers. The DNA done in 2003 totally isolated good DNA that did not come from a cough or sneeze from some factory worker. JMO

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by Athena


Track record? This was Steve Thomas' first homicide case -- even Eller the Commander had NEVER directed a homicide and refused advise from everyone and anyone. The only one from what I've read that was actually familiar with procedures was Larry Mason and he and Eller knocked heads because of it because Eller needed to be the "boss". Many egos were involved here and the Denver PD even ridiculed them with t-shirts that bore a slogan that read "they do it right" (might not be exact words - but something to that effect.

After an hour and a half the investigation was announced to be completed by Eller until Hofstrom intervened and said he wanted every fiber, every footprint, every fingerprint, floorboards ripped up, drains tested, etc. If it weren't for the DA's office even less would have been forthcoming.

As soon as a kidnapping was reported the BPD should have called in the FBI and never even got involved until the FBI directed them to - up until 1PM when the body was found.

Steve Thomas twisted everything thus the name "Twisted Thomas" bullmoose gave him which I believe is quite appro-pro. All you need do is read his book and compare it to his depo. Many, many contradictions all made to fit his accidental bedwetting theory. In addition to that he was the direct leak to the media to gain exactly the public opinion that he did based on his unproven theory. Unfortunately the damage was done and alot of people still believe the old misinformation that is still out there.

One thing we all know is that you are supposed to follow the evidence to where it leads not make it fit your theory and personally most of the RDIs do exactly that -- make it fit their theories.

I am not certain the Ramseys did not do this but there is a heck of alot of evidence that points away from them. Alot of the so-called evidence that points to them is totally conjecture and speculation and does not a murderer make.

Even in PMPT Schiller specifically says the more the BPD investigated the less apparent it became that it WAS the Ramseys who did this. Whether Hunter erred in not arresting them for probable cause he certainly was correct they would have never been convicted without a reasonable doubt with the flimsy trace evidence they had.

Also been reading up on this DNA issue and the DNA was not degraded -- it was contaminated due to clipping of JBRs nails with unsterile clippers. The DNA done in 2003 totally isolated good DNA that did not come from a cough or sneeze from some factory worker. JMO I have never bought the idea that dna came from a cough or a sneeze from a factory! It is imho the dna of the murderer, and he will be caught! It's just a matter of time! I just hope it's soon! :seeya: Oh, and I have no respect for ST, anyone that would leak false info during a murder investigation isn't a professional in my book! jmho

[Ames]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


Why do you think Boulder is different from other places?

(Just heard something in the background - Fox News - Bill O'R - something about Lacey being on later.)

Just going by what CK said, since she has lived there...and still lives near there. I now live in the northwest, and know alot of people from Colorado, and they all say that Boulder is unlike any other city.

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by Ames


I again, did not make it back in time to edit...I need to be quicker.

What I was asking in the post above is....because the FBI was not involved...was it STLL a Federal case? The GJ that my husband testified at, were all Federal cases...so, they may be done differently. I don't know...he isn't here, or I would ask him.

They were chosen from a pool in Boulder Cty. So....mmm doubtful it was a Federal Case. It was under the leadership of DA Alex Hunter.

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by Athena


Track record? This was Steve Thomas' first homicide case -- even Eller the Commander had NEVER directed a homicide and refused advise from everyone and anyone. The only one from what I've read that was actually familiar with procedures was Larry Mason and he and Eller knocked heads because of it because Eller needed to be the "boss". Many egos were involved here and the Denver PD even ridiculed them with t-shirts that bore a slogan that read "they do it right" (might not be exact words - but something to that effect.

After an hour and a half the investigation was announced to be completed by Eller until Hofstrom intervened and said he wanted every fiber, every footprint, every fingerprint, floorboards ripped up, drains tested, etc. If it weren't for the DA's office even less would have been forthcoming.

As soon as a kidnapping was reported the BPD should have called in the FBI and never even got involved until the FBI directed them to - up until 1PM when the body was found.

Steve Thomas twisted everything thus the name "Twisted Thomas" bullmoose gave him which I believe is quite appro-pro. All you need do is read his book and compare it to his depo. Many, many contradictions all made to fit his accidental bedwetting theory. In addition to that he was the direct leak to the media to gain exactly the public opinion that he did based on his unproven theory. Unfortunately the damage was done and alot of people still believe the old misinformation that is still out there.

One thing we all know is that you are supposed to follow the evidence to where it leads not make it fit your theory and personally most of the RDIs do exactly that -- make it fit their theories.

I am not certain the Ramseys did not do this but there is a heck of alot of evidence that points away from them. Alot of the so-called evidence that points to them is totally conjecture and speculation and does not a murderer make.

Even in PMPT Schiller specifically says the more the BPD investigated the less apparent it became that it WAS the Ramseys who did this. Whether Hunter erred in not arresting them for probable cause he certainly was correct they would have never been convicted without a reasonable doubt with the flimsy trace evidence they had.

Also been reading up on this DNA issue and the DNA was not degraded -- it was contaminated due to clipping of JBRs nails with unsterile clippers. The DNA done in 2003 totally isolated good DNA that did not come from a cough or sneeze from some factory worker. JMO

I think i said feel free to scrutinize the track record. Thomas was exemplary in Lakewood. Not his fault Boulder has relatively few homicides. It was not Thomas's error that they did not avail themself to the help offered from Denver. You believe whatever you want regarding DA Hunter. We also shall do that from his record of crimes prosecuted at all here. We are the taxpayers . We have that right. In my opinion the case should have gone to court not because I read a book or even a website. Because I am a citizen.

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I have never bought the idea that dna came from a cough or a sneeze from a factory! It is imho the dna of the murderer, and he will be caught! It's just a matter of time! I just hope it's soon! :seeya: Oh, and I have no respect for ST, anyone that would leak false info during a murder investigation isn't a professional in my book! jmho

Why? It's already been proven by Dr. Lee that it could have come from a cough or a sneeze. I see no reason to dismiss the possibility.

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I have never bought the idea that dna came from a cough or a sneeze from a factory! It is imho the dna of the murderer, and he will be caught! It's just a matter of time! I just hope it's soon! :seeya: Oh, and I have no respect for ST, anyone that would leak false info during a murder investigation isn't a professional in my book! jmho

And it is totally your right to do so. I respect that. I also have a right to be suspicious it will ever produce anything when it was degraded ....degradation comes from aging of the DNA and the blood was fresh but you have that right to believe what ever you wish. I don't care if you respect ST or anyone but becareful how you state your disrespect and state it so adamently like you know for fact the information was false and leaked by Thomas . Just be cautious only reason I say that or care a hoot is Webslueths has a poster getting sued. So do try to remember unless you have absolute proof sitting on ice somewhere you'd be protecting your own best interests to be careful in how you express your adamant personally held beliefs. Nothing to me either way. But you won't hear me spout of So and so did it thats a fact. Nope....I really don't want to face a lawsuit and I'd say Westmoreland filing suit is absolute proof these boards and forums are monitored.

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by Ames


Just going by what CK said, since she has lived there...and still lives near there. I now live in the northwest, and know alot of people from Colorado, and they all say that Boulder is unlike any other city.

Peope read books and websites and think well thats not right that wouldn't happen like that. They forget the Boulder factor.
Boulder is unlike anyplace. We band cigarette smoking in any public way and try to legalize marijuana . I could go on and on and on. Yes Boulder is unlike any other place. Thats a fact.

[Athena]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


I think i said feel free to scrutinize the track record. Thomas was exemplary in Lakewood. Not his fault Boulder has relatively few homicides. It was not Thomas's error that they did not avail themself to the help offered from Denver. You believe whatever you want regarding DA Hunter. We also shall do that from his record of crimes prosecuted at all here. We are the taxpayers . We have that right. In my opinion the case should have gone to court not because I read a book or even a website. Because I am a citizen.

Yes - I also am a citizen just not located in CO so I can understand your concern re: taxpayer's $. But what is your decision based on? It has nothing to do with whether or not I believe or not believe anything about Hunter -- it is the flimsy evidence and based on that I understood his decision. Thomas' error was a rush to judgement and being too narrow-minded to see what they really had. JMO

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by Ames



Yes, I know that there would have been no way for anyone to have known that he was going to run for political office. BUT...IMO...in Boulder, where things are alot different than other places, John's influence could have swayed the GJ decision. He was extremely well known there...before the murder. And I don't think its so much that he had money (so did Ken Lay, Martha Stewart...etc), but that he was well known and liked in the community. IMO

He was well connected to power brokers and may well have had political aspirations of his own one day. He ran with some fat cats or in our area we say run with the big dogs. Politically based friends as Gail Schoettler. Lt. Gov. I fail to comprehend how readers don't connect to Defense Contracts Lockeheed and all of that is it truly they don't want to hear or don't comprehend billion dollar sales and the sale to Lockheed. Hello Silicon Valley Colorado style. $$$$$$ Not saying he was the fatest cat or biggest dog but he was playing in the ball park and the competition was fever pitch. You got to be doing something right to top a billion in sales in only one years time from a million in sales.

[shill]

Originally posted by Athena


Also been reading up on this DNA issue and the DNA was not degraded -- it was contaminated due to clipping of JBRs nails with unsterile clippers. The DNA done in 2003 totally isolated good DNA that did not come from a cough or sneeze from some factory worker. JMO
Oh don't get CK started. You think the ransom note was long winded, you ain't seen nothing yet.

[Athena]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


Why? It's already been proven by Dr. Lee that it could have come from a cough or a sneeze. I see no reason to dismiss the possibility.

Link please. Lee said that PRIOR to the isolation of the DNA in 2003.

[Athena]

Originally posted by shill

Oh don't get CK started. You think the ransom note was long winded, you ain't seen nothing yet.

That's OK -- I can get pretty long-winded too. :biggrin:

[Athena]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


And it is totally your right to do so. I respect that. I also have a right to be suspicious it will ever produce anything when it was degraded ....degradation comes from aging of the DNA and the blood was fresh but you have that right to believe what ever you wish. I don't care if you respect ST or anyone but becareful how you state your disrespect and state it so adamently like you know for fact the information was false and leaked by Thomas . Just be cautious only reason I say that or care a hoot is Webslueths has a poster getting sued. So do try to remember unless you have absolute proof sitting on ice somewhere you'd be protecting your own best interests to be careful in how you express your adamant personally held beliefs. Nothing to me either way. But you won't hear me spout of So and so did it thats a fact. Nope....I really don't want to face a lawsuit and I'd say Westmoreland filing suit is absolute proof these boards and forums are monitored.

Degradation - The fragmenting, or breakdown of DNA by chemical or physical means.

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by Athena


Link please. Lee said that PRIOR to the isolation of the DNA in 2003.

You don't need a link, you already know what he said. Why does it make a difference that he showed it before 2003.

[shill]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


He was well connected to power brokers and may well have had political aspirations of his own one day. He ran with some fat cats or in our area we say run with the big dogs. Politically based friends as Gail Schoettler. Lt. Gov. I fail to comprehend how readers don't connect to Defense Contracts Lockeheed and all of that is it truly they don't want to hear or don't comprehend billion dollar sales and the sale to Lockheed. Hello Silicon Valley Colorado style. $$$$$$ Not saying he was the fatest cat or biggest dog but he was playing in the ball park and the competition was fever pitch. You got to be doing something right to top a billion in sales in only one years time from a million in sales. So to theorize a motive for JB's murder that someone wanted to take down John, a Big Dog, because there were billions of dollars at stake, and the murder of JB led to the Big Dogs downfall, would that theory be credible based on the post above.

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by Athena


Yes - I also am a citizen just not located in CO so I can understand your concern re: taxpayer's $. But what is your decision based on? It has nothing to do with whether or not I believe or not believe anything about Hunter -- it is the flimsy evidence and based on that I understood his decision. Thomas' error was a rush to judgement and being too narrow-minded to see what they really had. JMO

I guess there are people who don't consider the evidence as flimsy as you do. Are you basing all your beliefs about this case on Intruder Theory presented by Smit? Do you know that it was no secret that Hunter revealed to more than just one who he felt was responsible for the death. He wanted Airtight / Confession and that was just a water cooler rumor. You of course are entitled to not believe that. I know you think I am this RDI. Not your typical RDI. IDI or FS. I just want the evidence to be heard before a jury. Not a Grand Jury who didn't even interview the 2 adults present on the night of the murder or see the evidence. Who when it convened had a member who said she didn't believe a parent could have done this. Yes I know they decide who to see or what to see. But it blows many of our minds or at least most rational thinking Colorado taxpayers that I personally know.

[Athena]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


You don't need a link, you already know what he said. Why does it make a difference that he showed it before 2003.

Because Lee has since changed his opinion since the earlier part of the investigation. He also NEVER PROVED that the DNA was artifact; he said it was a possibility back then.

I saw him on a talk show when the Karr story broke and I know he specifically said DNA had advanced since he had been involved in the case and knew the DNA had been isolated. I did find this however it is not the talk show I saw him on; I don't think he would have made these comments if he still believed it to be artifact:

LEE: Well, the DNA, they found some foreign DNA. One source of DNA is found on her underpants, with some small amount of bloodstain. The second one is from fingernail scrapings. Those DNA are already analyzed by Boulder, Colorado, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation Forensic Laboratory. So those DNA are really in digital form. So the time aging is no longer an issue. The DNA are already exact. The profile is already made. So right now, basically the collection is no DNA and transfer that to digital form and compare it with the question DNA found on Jon Benet Ramsey's underpants and fingernails.

et us get into this and see where this man was. And if he wasn't in Boulder, that's the end of it. If he's in Boulder, let's move from there. The DNA, why wasn't the DNA tested before they went into all of this? As Dr. Lee pointed out, that DNA is in place from JonBenet Ramsey. They could have picked up a specimen from John Karr.

ROWLANDS: OK, we don't have a lot of time. Dr. Lee, what's your gut feeling on this? Do you think that they have the right man here?

LEE: Well, maybe. As Bob Grant said, we have to look at the evidence, let the evidence speak for itself. The crime scene still has a lot of unknown factors which, if he can provide information, inside information about the ligature and the rest of it can be a true individual.

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0608/18/lkl.06.html

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


And it is totally your right to do so. I respect that. I also have a right to be suspicious it will ever produce anything when it was degraded ....degradation comes from aging of the DNA and the blood was fresh but you have that right to believe what ever you wish. I don't care if you respect ST or anyone but becareful how you state your disrespect and state it so adamently like you know for fact the information was false and leaked by Thomas . Just be cautious only reason I say that or care a hoot is Webslueths has a poster getting sued. So do try to remember unless you have absolute proof sitting on ice somewhere you'd be protecting your own best interests to be careful in how you express your adamant personally held beliefs. Nothing to me either way. But you won't hear me spout of So and so did it thats a fact. Nope....I really don't want to face a lawsuit and I'd say Westmoreland filing suit is absolute proof these boards and forums are monitored. I always state that is it my humble opinion! I think ST was you and inexperienced at homicide investigations....I've never once accused anyone of this murder...I think the murderer is a psychopath that had a grudge against JR! I think he was relatively young at the time of the murder...I think he was a lazy bum, who either lived off of his parents or a girlfriend! I think he was a sexual sadist! He never intended on kidnapping JB, he wrote that note imho as an afterthought once he was in the home...he entered the home while they were at the White's party....now, if the true killer would like to step up to the plate and sue me, I wish he would, I would say the same thing to his face...I'm not certain who he is, but he had to be very familiar with that home, it wasn't the first time he was there, imho! And I do have a ? concerning Steve Thomas, is or was there anything in his past concerning his own mother that might have influenced his determination that it had to be Patsy that killed her daughter? Does anyone know anything about him and his personal life? I do recall when he was facing PR on LKL he told her "she was good for it", meaning she murdered JB! imho And yes, I believe in this country we still have the right to ask ?s about anyone in this case! I just can't believe that some would connect Rod Westmoreland with this murder, he was the man who helped JR raise the ransom money, he was never to my knowledge a suspect! CO, I do know that the boards are monitored, two other cases I posted on, one was the Michael Peterson trial it was monitored by family members of the deceased, and by the prosecution and defense teams....so I do realize that! jmo

[Athena]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


I guess there are people who don't consider the evidence as flimsy as you do. Are you basing all your beliefs about this case on Intruder Theory presented by Smit? Do you know that it was no secret that Hunter revealed to more than just one who he felt was responsible for the death. He wanted Airtight / Confession and that was just a water cooler rumor. You of course are entitled to not believe that. I know you think I am this RDI. Not your typical RDI. IDI or FS. I just want the evidence to be heard before a jury. Not a Grand Jury who didn't even interview the 2 adults present on the night of the murder or see the evidence. Who when it convened had a member who said she didn't believe a parent could have done this. Yes I know they decide who to see or what to see. But it blows many of our minds or at least most rational thinking Colorado taxpayers that I personally know.

You know you keep attempting to read my mind by stating your opinions about what or who I believe or not.

I have based my conclusions based on years of researching this case and got involved again when Karr was arrested.

I don't base my conclusions on Smit either. He is at the other extreme. I rely on the research I have done, the transcripts etc

BTW - you can't go to trial without an indictment by the Grand Jury and you don't need a unanimous vote so that one juror who couldn't believe they did it made no difference. You only need 2/3 or 3/4 vote depending on the number of grand jurists which means out of 12 (in this case) you needed 9. Apparently the Grand Jury thought the evidence to be flimsy or they would have indicted. They ALL read 30-40,000 pages of evidence -- so I don't know what you are talking about re: them not reviewing evidence. :rolleyes:

You know at first when I "saw" a person here from Colorado I was like wow -- someone from the state of the Ramseys.

But after reading your posts where first you quoted books which statements turned out not to be true -- now you are claiming you have "inside" information around a water cooler.

You don't know any more about this case than some other mis-informed people. JMO

[nuisanceposter]

Dr Henry Lee went out and bought the same kind of underwear that JonBenet was found in, brand new, unwashed, and tested them for DNA, which he found.

There was DNA on pairs of Bloomie's underwear that came straight out of the package.

It's entirely possible that the DNA found in JonBenet's underwear came from someone who handled them before they put on her, and considering the DNA in her undies was degraded and fragmented while hers was fresh and complete, I'd say it's extremely likely that the DNA in JonBenet's undies was already there before she was ever dressed in them.

[nuisanceposter]

Originally posted by Athena

<snip>

They ALL read 30-40,000 pages of evidence -- so I don't know what you are talking about re: them not reviewing evidence.

No offense, Athena, but how can you be sure they actually read it all?

[Athena]

Originally posted by nuisanceposter


No offense, Athena, but how can you be sure they actually read it all?

OK - You're right on that one. I wasn't there. But what did they do then since that's all there was not counting the few witnesses who testifed for 13 months? Kane is the one who presented the forensic evidence so even if they did not read all of the documents, Kane was definitely anti-Ramsey.

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I always state that is it my humble opinion! I think ST was you and inexperienced at homicide investigations....I've never once accused anyone of this murder...I think the murderer is a psychopath that had a grudge against JR! I think he was relatively young at the time of the murder...I think he was a lazy bum, who either lived off of his parents or a girlfriend! I think he was a sexual sadist! He never intended on kidnapping JB, he wrote that note imho as an afterthought once he was in the home...he entered the home while they were at the White's party....now, if the true killer would like to step up to the plate and sue me, I wish he would, I would say the same thing to his face...I'm not certain who he is, but he had to be very familiar with that home, it wasn't the first time he was there, imho! And I do have a ? concerning Steve Thomas, is or was there anything in his past concerning his own mother that might have influenced his determination that it had to be Patsy that killed her daughter? Does anyone know anything about him and his personal life? I do recall when he was facing PR on LKL he told her "she was good for it", meaning she murdered JB! imho And yes, I believe in this country we still have the right to ask ?s about anyone in this case! I just can't believe that some would connect Rod Westmoreland with this murder, he was the man who helped JR raise the ransom money, he was never to my knowledge a suspect! CO, I do know that the boards are monitored, two other cases I posted on, one was the Michael Peterson trial it was monitored by family members of the deceased, and by the prosecution and defense teams....so I do realize that! jmo

You think Steve Thomas was me. ROTFLMHead OFF. My husband is going to love this . He thinks these board are just a bit to strange anyhow. Oh what a hoot. My Sons and grandchildren are going to get a bang out of this. All these years they called me mom and grandma. Honey I am Steve Thomas. Now that I am not laughing. I was sincerely saying hello.... realtiy check becareful in expressing your opinions. Lawsuites are ugly and costly ok. It does not matter in the least if you say its your humble opinion if it in anway could be considered that your opinion is slanderous or defamatory and can be proven in a court of law to be so. Well your honor I was only expressing my opinion. Well that is all undertheradar was doing too. Lin Woods filed the suite. Seriously just go read the notice its on this forum . Be careful how you express your opinion without making a statement that is bold or direct enough to be considered defamation and something that could be proven or considered slanderous. And all joking aside. I am hardly Steve Thomas or an underexperienced investigator ok. Just a housewife who cared alot about JonBenet cause my grandaughter and her were the same age. She was a little girl who did not deserve to die a horrible death. :lol:

[sweetcharlotte]

Actually, I'm guessing LadyFisher meant to type "young and inexperienced" .........but that's just a guess on my part. JMO

[Athena]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


You think Steve Thomas was me. ROTFLMHead OFF. My husband is going to love this . He thinks these board are just a bit to strange anyhow. Oh what a hoot. My Sons and grandchildren are going to get a bang out of this. All these years they called me mom and grandma. Honey I am Steve Thomas. Now that I am not laughing. I was sincerely saying hello.... realtiy check becareful in expressing your opinions. Lawsuites are ugly and costly ok. It does not matter in the least if you say its your humble opinion if it in anway could be considered that your opinion is slanderous or defamatory and can be proven in a court of law to be so. Well your honor I was only expressing my opinion. Well that is all undertheradar was doing too. Lin Woods filed the suite. Seriously just go read the notice its on this forum . Be careful how you express your opinion without making a statement that is bold or direct enough to be considered defamation and something that could be proven or considered slanderous. And all joking aside. I am hardly Steve Thomas or an underexperienced investigator ok. Just a housewife who cared alot about JonBenet cause my grandaughter and her were the same age. She was a little girl who did not deserve to die a horrible death. :lol:

Surely you realize LadyFisher made a typo or your reading comprehension is really that low? :shrug:

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte
Actually, I'm guessing LadyFisher meant to type "young and inexperienced" .........but that's just a guess on my part. JMO

Oh ok I guess you might be right. I read it and to me it read literally.... you . I bout fell right off my chair!

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by Athena


Surely you realize LadyFisher made a typo or your reading comprehension is really that low? :shrug:

You really don't want to go there do you? :no: Athena you have two choices in life. You can be open and receptive. Generally thought well of and have your opinions respected. Or not. I could furnish you with proof that my reading comprehension skills are adequate to keep me from requiring class hours in remedial reading. Actually, if you factor in I read what was written and comprehended exactly what was written what you want from me is not reading comprehension but clairvoyance. You want me to read what was not written. It is apparent that your post has nothing to do with concern regards my reading comprehension . It has to do with your obvious and blantant bias to defend a co IDI, not missing the opportunity to dig fang and claw into someone who you perceive to be an RDI. Feel free to debate ideations or opinion anytime. I am not overly concerned what your opinion is of my reading comprehension skills. I get by.:read: If your skills were razor sharp you'd see I was having fun, making light, finding humor instead of resorting to sharp tongued commentary and generally being a verbally abusive @ss. My reading comprehension skills or identity are not open for debate on this forum. That is why we use sign names. JonBenet's murder is.

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte
Actually, I'm guessing LadyFisher meant to type "young and inexperienced" .........but that's just a guess on my part. JMO :lol: I did mean YOUNG! I never meant Colorado! Oh, my, never post when you've worked 13 or 14 hour days! :chicken:

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
:lol: I did mean YOUNG! I never meant Colorado! Oh, my, never post when you've worked 13 or 14 hour days! :chicken:

Lady Fisher its okay....I have not had this much light hearted fun and sparkling laughter in days. ( Due to a death in our family ) It felt so good to get tickled about something again. Thanks :D

[LadyFisher]

I realize that Steve Thomas was in my humble opinion YOUNG & INEXPERIENCED at homicidal investigations....but...is there anything in this guys background that would/could have attributed to his determination to "get" Patsy Ramsey for this murder? What was his relationship like with his own mother? I am just asking, I am not trying to make any insinuations....just so you folks don't jump to any conclusions here! imho

[nuisanceposter]

You have to remember that Thomas focused on Patsy as the killer because that's where he thought the evidence led. He wasn't the only person who did, no matter how young and inexperienced he was. He had some very reputable experts including CASKU agreeing that the evidence most indicated a Ramsey as the killer, specifically Patsy.

It wasn't that he had some unresolved psychological issue guiding him towards thinking Patsy was the best candidate, there was a lot of evidence that led to her involvement, such as the fiber evidence (he talks about the four fibers on the tape in his book) and the RN she could not be excluded as author of.

Let's remember what Schiller had to say about Steve Thomas:

"From my investigation of the Ramsey murder, Steve Thomas was the lead detective on the case from the beginning and may know what happened better than anyone." --Lawrence Schiller

http://www.amazon.com/JonBenet-Steve-Thomas/dp/0312978618

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by nuisanceposter
You have to remember that Thomas focused on Patsy as the killer because that's where he thought the evidence led. He wasn't the only person who did, no matter how young and inexperienced he was. He had some very reputable experts including CASKU agreeing that the evidence most indicated a Ramsey as the killer, specifically Patsy.

It wasn't that he had some unresolved psychological issue guiding him towards thinking Patsy was the best candidate, there was a lot of evidence that led to her involvement, such as the fiber evidence (he talks about the four fibers on the tape in his book) and the RN she could not be excluded as author of.

Let's remember what Schiller had to say about Steve Thomas:

"From my investigation of the Ramsey murder, Steve Thomas was the lead detective on the case from the beginning and may know what happened better than anyone." --Lawrence Schiller

http://www.amazon.com/JonBenet-Steve-Thomas/dp/0312978618 I understand what you are saying...but, you still didn't answer my ?s concerning Thomas! imho we all approach a case or anything else for that matter with what life/job experience we have! Thomas had very little experience with solving homicides....every case cannot be solved by "statistics" either....I realize why folks come to the conclusion it had to be someone in that home or very familiar with the home....but why didn't Thomas focus on John? Why Patsy? It took some force imho to cause the blunt force trauma to JBs skull, why would he assume it was Patsy & especially choosing it had to be initiated by a bedwetting incident? Children wet their beds all the time, parents don't kill them over it...My ? was and is....could there be something in his background that aided in his determination this murder HAD to be committed by Patsy? What do you all know about Thomas personally? I know very little about his personal life! jmho

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


Lady Fisher its okay....I have not had this much light hearted fun and sparkling laughter in days. ( Due to a death in our family ) It felt so good to get tickled about something again. Thanks :D I truly am sorry for the recent death in your family, I can relate to that! Laughter does help us, doesn't it! Have a great day Colorado, and I knew you weren't Thomas! :)

[nuisanceposter]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I understand what you are saying...but, you still didn't answer my ?s concerning Thomas! imho we all approach a case or anything else for that matter with what life/job experience we have! Thomas had very little experience with solving homicides....every case cannot be solved by "statistics" either....I realize why folks come to the conclusion it had to be someone in that home or very familiar with the home....but why didn't Thomas focus on John? Why Patsy? It took some force imho to cause the blunt force trauma to JBs skull, why would he assume it was Patsy & especially choosing it had to be initiated by a bedwetting incident? Children wet their beds all the time, parents don't kill them over it...My ? was and is....could there be something in his background that aided in his determination this murder HAD to be committed by Patsy? What do you all know about Thomas personally? I know very little about his personal life! jmho

It was a culmination of a lot of things.

Patsy was the more dominant parent in JonBenet's life. John wasn't around much, and Patsy was known to be the one who took care of the kids and household stuff.

It was Patsy's routine to go get JonBenet up at midnight and take her to the bathroom.

JonBenet was cleaned up and redressed and tucked in, which is something a parent would do, specifically the mother.

He thought she wrote the RN. The overall statement sounds as though a woman wrote it to him, with concern for John being well-rested and the accomplices referred to as gentlemen, for example.

The pad of paper was from a pad that Patsy regularly used for herself. She admitted to writing the practice note, but for another reason.

There was no semen, indicating this was not a male perp or not a gratification assault.

Patsy said to ST that she thought maybe a woman had written the RN. She also stated that they didn't know if the killer was male or female. She also came right out and said to him that she didn't kill her baby, before anyone even asked her. He saw all that as odd and indicative of her involvement or knowledge of what happened.

That's just off the top of my head. If you'd really like to know why Steve Thomas thinks Patsy is the killer, please read it in his own words, in his book. He goes into far more detail than I ever could.

If you're reluctant to read his book, just approach it with an open mind and remind yourself this is for better understanding of the case overall. I was reluctant to read DOI, but bought it and have read it many times over, because I wanted to know what the Ramseys themselves thought and what their view was.

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by nuisanceposter

<snip>

That's just off the top of my head. If you'd really like to know why Steve Thomas thinks Patsy is the killer, please read it in his own words, in his book. He goes into far more detail than I ever could.
<snip>



From PM/PT Pages 517 & 518 - reasons presented by Steve Thomas on why the BPD thought a Ramsey did it - paraphrased.

-Date engraved on JonBenet's headstone 12/25/96 indicating the Ramseys knew she died on the 25th. December 25 - before midnight - was the earliest appx. time of death judging from the state of pineapple found in her small intestine.


-Sound tests conducted by BPD indicated scream should have been heard by the parents in their bedroom

-Behavior of John & Patsy when BPD arrived -more in keeping with a death than a kidnapping

-Phone call placed by John to arrange to fly to Atlanta made within 35 minutes of JonBenet being found

-Prior vaginal trauma unlikely to have been caused by a person
outside the immediate family

-Flashlight, writing pad and Sharpie pen were all found in kitchen area. The flashlight - on kitchen counter.

-Ransom note written on paper torn from writing pad

-Sharpie pen used to write the note was not found close to the pad but in a cup next to the kitchen phone where the pen was kept

-Writing pad discovered close to where the ransom note was allegdly found

-Patsy could not been eliminated as author of the note

-Enhanced 911 tape contradicted with the version of the events as told by John and Patsy

-Patsy' statements about when she discovered her daughter was not in her room and John's statements about what he did with his daughter after taking her to bed on Dec 25th were in consistent

-Paintbrush used in the garrote was linked to Patsy

-Confusing layout of the home woud make it difficult for a stranger to commit all aspect of the crime and its cover-up without fear of discovery

-Elements used in aftermath of the crime and its staging - such as blanket - obtained from places in the house known to the parents

-When the first officer arrived at the house Patsy answered the door fully dressed with her make-up own.



Some of these "reasons" have been disproved and many are - IMO - very weak.

JMO

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by Athena


Because Lee has since changed his opinion since the earlier part of the investigation. He also NEVER PROVED that the DNA was artifact; he said it was a possibility back then.

I saw him on a talk show when the Karr story broke and I know he specifically said DNA had advanced since he had been involved in the case and knew the DNA had been isolated. I did find this however it is not the talk show I saw him on; I don't think he would have made these comments if he still believed it to be artifact:

LEE: Well, the DNA, they found some foreign DNA. One source of DNA is found on her underpants, with some small amount of bloodstain. The second one is from fingernail scrapings. Those DNA are already analyzed by Boulder, Colorado, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation Forensic Laboratory. So those DNA are really in digital form. So the time aging is no longer an issue. The DNA are already exact. The profile is already made. So right now, basically the collection is no DNA and transfer that to digital form and compare it with the question DNA found on Jon Benet Ramsey's underpants and fingernails.

et us get into this and see where this man was. And if he wasn't in Boulder, that's the end of it. If he's in Boulder, let's move from there. The DNA, why wasn't the DNA tested before they went into all of this? As Dr. Lee pointed out, that DNA is in place from JonBenet Ramsey. They could have picked up a specimen from John Karr.

ROWLANDS: OK, we don't have a lot of time. Dr. Lee, what's your gut feeling on this? Do you think that they have the right man here?

LEE: Well, maybe. As Bob Grant said, we have to look at the evidence, let the evidence speak for itself. The crime scene still has a lot of unknown factors which, if he can provide information, inside information about the ligature and the rest of it can be a true individual.

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0608/18/lkl.06.html

I still don't see what has changed, or see anything in Lee's comments that you quote that contradicts his earlier statements.

He had said, years ago, that the DNA could be artifact. (I'm paraphrasing) He had bought the same type of panties and found they had artifact dNA.. He didn't say it had to be artifact DNA. He didn't say it had to be from a chinese factory workerer, just that it could be.

There is no doubt the DNA science has progressed over the years, but I don't see what makes you think Lee has changed his position.

[andU]

I would really like to see the investigators go by other evidence and lastly test the DNA. Because it didn't match any of the people that other evidence points to, ya know? ... Could it mean (sharp inhale) the killer is still out there, an undetected intruder?

[thewhitewitch1]

Originally posted by andU
I would really like to see the investigators go by other evidence and lastly test the DNA. Because it didn't match any of the people that other evidence points to, ya know? ... Could it mean (sharp inhale) the killer is still out there, an undetected intruder?

What other intruder evidence do they have that can actually lead to an intruder? Nothing, really. IMO

[Athena]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1


What other intruder evidence do they have that can actually lead to an intruder? Nothing, really. IMO

Because suspects were not investigated thoroughly. Some of them NEVER submitted DNA or handwriting samples and didn't have alibis but the Thomas and his cronies were so stuck on RDI they let a killer loose. JMO

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by Athena


Because suspects were not investigated thoroughly. Some of them NEVER submitted DNA or handwriting samples and didn't have alibis but the Thomas and his cronies were so stuck on RDI they let a killer loose. JMO

Athena, Nusianceposter provided to this forum to SweetCharlotte and all other posters a list of howmany others Steve Thomas followed up on that alone his cronies. It was exhaustive and impressive. The discussion at the time of that post was that associated to his thyroid condition. Please feel free to find that post back or have Nusiance Poster provide this to you should you have missed it. Not everyone had to submit sample or dna... that was thrown under the bus. Some did irregardless provide whatever they could to eleminate even the slightest doubt. If there was not a possible way they were within a country mile of the scene they still acquired some....But many proved where they were with proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Proof they DNA'd some who would have difficulty even proving they could have been there was JMK. They cannot place him in Boulder. However they did it because of confession reasons

[Athena]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


Athena, Nusianceposter provided to this forum to SweetCharlotte and all other posters a list of howmany others Steve Thomas followed up on that alone his cronies. It was exhaustive and impressive. The discussion at the time of that post was that associated to his thyroid condition. Please feel free to find that post back or have Nusiance Poster provide this to you should you have missed it. Not everyone had to submit sample or dna... that was thrown under the bus. Some did irregardless provide whatever they could to eleminate even the slightest doubt. If there was not a possible way they were within a country mile of the scene they still acquired some....But many proved where they were with proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Proof they DNA'd some who would have difficulty even proving they could have been there was JMK. They cannot place him in Boulder. However they did it because of confession reasons

CK - I am extremely familiar with the facts of this case and I can assure you again that MANY suspects who should have submitted DNA and handwriting samples refused to do so and they had NO alibis. They weren't pressed because the BPD were stuck on RDI.

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by Athena


CK - I am extremely familiar with the facts of this case and I can assure you again that MANY suspects who should have submitted DNA and handwriting samples refused to do so and they had NO alibis. They weren't pressed because the BPD were stuck on RDI.

Athena I know that you feel you are extremely familiar with the facts of this case. However Its your opinion that many suspects who you feel should have submitted DNA and handwriting samples refused to do so. I just sent you a Media interview with Jeff Merrick. Norm Early Former Denver DA has known Merrick for about 40 years..... Interview was with Peter Boyles. 630 KHOW.
I don't agree that the BPD were stuck on RDI. I am not trying to say you are without knowledge I just happen to consider Nusianceposter a very knowledgeable poster to the forum and to the internet on this subject. I also highly respect Norm Early and those who conducted this interview. So as humble as it is I have an opinion. I don't consider myself any self proclaimed expert.

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


Athena I know that you feel you are extremely familiar with the facts of this case. However Its your opinion that many suspects who you feel should have submitted DNA and handwriting samples refused to do so. I just sent you a Media interview with Jeff Merrick. Norm Early Former Denver DA has known Merrick for about 40 years..... Interview was with Peter Boyles. 630 KHOW.
I don't agree that the BPD were stuck on RDI. I am not trying to say you are without knowledge I just happen to consider Nusianceposter a very knowledgeable poster to the forum and to the internet on this subject. I also highly respect Norm Early and those who conducted this interview. So as humble as it is I have an opinion. I don't consider myself any self proclaimed expert.

try this link. I think my paste feature gave the wrong link.

http://dimwit.bythost5.com/jeff%20merr

For some reason as I try to copy and paste the link it comes up on windows media and reverts auto to the link I'd sent prior:shrug: Computers......:seeya:

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by Athena


CK - I am extremely familiar with the facts of this case and I can assure you again that MANY suspects who should have submitted DNA and handwriting samples refused to do so and they had NO alibis. They weren't pressed because the BPD were stuck on RDI.

Here is the post made by Nusianceposter regarding the review of suspects etc. by Thomas. If nothing else consider adding it to your base of knowledge regarding the case. You cannot say they only looked at the Ramseys with total disregard at all the manhours that went into review of other suspects etc.


He interviewed 590 people, consulted 64 outside experts, investigated and cleared more than 100 possible suspects, collected 1,058 pieces of evidence, tested over 500 items at federal, state, and private laboratories, gathered handwriting and nontestimonial evidence from 215 people, built a case that exceeded 30,000 pages, reviewed more than 3,400 letters and 700 telephone tips, and contacted 17 states and 2 foreign countries.

It isn't his fault the evidence kept indicating Ramsey involvement.

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


try this link. I think my paste feature gave the wrong link.

http://dimwit.bythost5.com/jeff%20merr

For some reason as I try to copy and paste the link it comes up on windows media and reverts auto to the link I'd sent prior:shrug: Computers......:seeya:

let me correct that link addy.

[url]http://dimwit.byethost5.com/jeff%20merr
magic fingers!! I tried honest I did to copy and paste it from the website the interview was playing on. It reverts back when I hit copy and paste to the link prior to that I sent out. then as you see in trying to just hand type it in I boobooed with my magic fingers. I really hope you get to hear the interview. Its was honestly excellent.

It is worth your time to hear it if I got this link in right. I am red faced and cold in Colorado. Its -2 out here. Snow blankets everything. Talk about your winterwonderland.......:seeya:

[Louisadelmar]

a bowel of cereal...God!... I swear these raisins are freaking rocks!

Try soaking them in prune juice or perhaps some Citrucel.

[bullmoose]

How long after Twisting Thomas was assigned to the case did he go off on sick leave for his thyroid condition? And then resigned with that river of tears for poor old sick Steve letter that made everybody look bad[except for the Twister]. Am I alone in seeing the impressive numbers, no incredible numbers seeming to indicate a human dynamo at work, or are these simply the numbers quoted by the twister in his boo-hoo bye-bye? And he didn't even mention in his list of achievements how many tabloid buddies he kept informed, or how many leaks he provided to each and every one of his pals. I guess his innate modesty kept him from listing that category.

[Athena]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


Here is the post made by Nusianceposter regarding the review of suspects etc. by Thomas. If nothing else consider adding it to your base of knowledge regarding the case. You cannot say they only looked at the Ramseys with total disregard at all the manhours that went into review of other suspects etc.


He interviewed 590 people, consulted 64 outside experts, investigated and cleared more than 100 possible suspects, collected 1,058 pieces of evidence, tested over 500 items at federal, state, and private laboratories, gathered handwriting and nontestimonial evidence from 215 people, built a case that exceeded 30,000 pages, reviewed more than 3,400 letters and 700 telephone tips, and contacted 17 states and 2 foreign countries.

It isn't his fault the evidence kept indicating Ramsey involvement.

I don't want so-called stats -- I need facts, names and why they were cleared. Easy for someone to make up numbers (not referring to NP) without providing backup. I could make up numbers too if I did not have to justify them. There are several forums trying to match names with those numbers -- can't find one yet even with the most knowledable posters that come even close. JMO

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by Athena


I don't want so-called stats -- I need facts, names and why they were cleared. Easy for someone to make up numbers (not referring to NP) without providing backup. I could make up numbers too if I did not have to justify them. There are several forums trying to match names with those numbers -- can't find one yet even with the most knowledable posters that come even close. JMO

If that is the information that you require. Call BPD or DA Lacy and see if they will provide that to you. I don't think NP would make anything like that up. Easy or not. I have never known her to take the easy way. Her links and knowledge are both impressive. I am also sure if she quoted it....they were from a credible source.

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by bullmoose

<snip>

And he didn't even mention in his list of achievements how many tabloid buddies he kept informed, or how many leaks he provided to each and every one of his pals. I guess his innate modesty kept him from listing that category.

Maybe he saved some for the jacket of his next "novel" which I predict will be forthcoming to refute what Linda Arndt has to say.........

JMO

[Athena]

Originally posted by Coloradokares


If that is the information that you require. Call BPD or DA Lacy and see if they will provide that to you. I don't think NP would make anything like that up. Easy or not. I have never known her to take the easy way. Her links and knowledge are both impressive. I am also sure if she quoted it....they were from a credible source.

CK you remind me of Twisted Thomas. I specifically said the numbers could have been made up and said NOT BY NP. Don't twist my words. If you wish to quote me at least do it accurately.

NP quoted Thomas. jmo

[Coloradokares]

Originally posted by Athena


CK you remind me of Twisted Thomas. I specifically said the numbers could have been made up and said NOT BY NP. Don't twist my words. If you wish to quote me at least do it accurately.

NP quoted Thomas. jmo

AThena!!!! You require information that only those sources can provide to you. That is not twisting your words. That is suggesting to you they may well be the only source that would be able to substantiate if Thomas's statistical numbers are correct or not. Think who else would have that information? Authors of books that were not on the inside of the BPD would not most likely have that information.

I know you said not by NP. I never said you said it was made up by NP. I thought all along you were refering to Thomas making it up but I chose a nice and polite way of saying if NP posted it the source of those numbers would be considered credible at least to her or she would not have posted it. There is nothing twisted about any of that Athena. However in furhter review I can find one thing perhaps a little twisted. Your saying that Thomas is twisted and I remind you of him. That was just plain WRONG Athena..... your better than that. Or at least you try to make it seem like you are.

[Athena]

Well CK ... this is how the ignore feature works and I have just used it.

This person is on your Ignore List. To view this post click [here]