Lawrence Schiller now believes the intruder theory!!!

New Posts

shiloh said:
I'm quoting myself here. Those fibers were not necessarily from JR's shirt. Those may be the same dark fibers which are said to have the foreign DNA.

I don't believe that John Ramsey ever harmed his daughter.
Click to expand...
Fibers cannot be dna, can they?
 
Goody said:
Fibers cannot be dna, can they?
Click to expand...
OF COURSE NOT. If you read what I wrote, you will find that I said, "Those may be the same dark fibers which are said to have the foreign DNA. " Have, not be.
 
shiloh said:
OF COURSE NOT. If you read what I wrote, you will find that I said, "Those may be the same dark fibers which are said to have the foreign DNA. " Have, not be.
Click to expand...
You mean to tell me that the foreign dna is in fibers believed to have come from John's shirt?
 
sissi said:
I don't remember it in a book, not that it's not there, I thought it was something Shapiro said about a tree house?? Maybe?"

I remember a tree house too, maybe not the same tree, or was it?


" M.....A psychotic child murderer stalks a city, and despite an exhaustive investigation fueled by public hysteria and outcry, the police have been unable to find him. But the police crackdown does have one side-affect, it makes it nearly impossible for the organized criminal underground to operate. So they decide that the only way to get the police off their backs is to catch the murderer themselves. Besides, he is giving them a bad name. "

Thanks for the synopsis of the movie "M".

"But then again, Ren and Stimpy did an M, and it was censored out in the US."
Click to expand...

You mean there's two "M" movies, one of them not seen in America? Similar plot? Did one of them plagarize the other?
 
Goody said:
You mean to tell me that the foreign dna is in fibers believed to have come from John's shirt?
Click to expand...
They are described as "dark fibers." What I am saying is that the fibers are not necessarily from John's shirt. Both the fibers found in her underwear and the fibers in his shirt could have been dark cotton, for example, but from separate sources. We simply don't know. The fibers could have been from his shirt, in which case the foreign DNA would probably be irrelevant, or the source of the dark fibers could be from an intruder-killer.
 
SuperDave said:
"I believe Wecht's analysis that she was sexually abused within a few days before the murder. But that doesn't mean it was John Ramsey who was abusing her, nor does it mean that that abuse was done by the same person as whoever killed her."

You're right. Even now, I wonder if it wasn't just two kids messing around.
Click to expand...
Isn't Cyril Wecht the one that was called in by a supermarket tabloid? Or was this the one with first hand professional knowledge of the case?

"You're right. Even now, I wonder if 'it' wasn't just two kids messing around."

The 'it' is presented here as something factual but really doesn't exist. Its just an idea, and a bad one.
 
Right, because it was dropped it was considered an "ugly, yet legal method" to anger John Ramsey to get a reaction. John Ramsey's shirt fibers were NOT found in her genital area. We have all heard, and read, interviews , depositions, and interogations, this is very, very common. Remember there were 4,000 fibers, and it's said, MANY can not be sourced to the Ramsey home! Would many mean two? IMO ,many, suggests that the bulk of the fibers found on her body can not be source to the Ramseys.
 
"M.....A psychotic child murderer stalks a city, and despite an exhaustive investigation fueled by public hysteria and outcry, the police have been unable to find him. But the police crackdown does have one side-affect, it makes it nearly impossible for the organized criminal underground to operate. So they decide that the only way to get the police off their backs is to catch the murderer themselves. Besides, he is giving them a bad name."

Germany, 1931. Directed by Fritz Lang. Starring Peter Lorre. Good movie!

"You mean to tell me that the foreign dna is in fibers believed to have come from John's shirt?"

Well, I don't think that was stated, but it's not as unbelievable as some would think.

"The fibers could have been from his shirt, in which case the foreign DNA would probably be irrelevant"

Never crossed my mind. But...

"Isn't Cyril Wecht the one that was called in by a supermarket tabloid? Or was this the one with first hand professional knowledge of the case?"

Yes, he was. BUT, several professionals with first-hand knowledge agreed with him.

"The 'it' is presented here as something factual but really doesn't exist. Its just an idea, and a bad one."

Well, I didn't mean to do that. I was just spitballing.

"Right, because it was dropped it was considered an "ugly, yet legal method" to anger John Ramsey to get a reaction. John Ramsey's shirt fibers were NOT found in her genital area."

I'm afraid that's wrong on several levels, sissi. They WERE. You're right: police CAN lie to a suspect. But Mr. Kane and Mr. Levin were not (are not) cops, and are, in fact, bound by strict rules of professional conduct:

Colorado State Bar Association Rules of Professional Conduct:

Rule 4.1 Truthfulness in Statements to Others. In the course of representing a client (in this case, the People, or the State, if you wish) a lawyer shall NOT (emphasis mine):

(a) make a false or misleading statement of fact or law; or

(b) fail to disclose a material fact when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by a client, unless disclosure is prohibited by Rule 1.6.

COMMENT

A misrepresentation can occur if the lawyer affirms a statement of another person that the lawyer knows is false.

Now, these interviews were recorded in full. Don't try to tell me that Kane and Levin are STUPID enough to break these rules on tape, knowing full well that doing so would likely result in disbarrment. Moreover, they're also smart enough to know that their statements would be challenged in court, thus they would have to know that supporting their testimony is absolutely necessary, not just to win a case, but to avoid ethics charges.

The subject was dropped because Wood would not allow his clients to answer, and according to law, if a lawyer says his client won't answer, that's it! You can't press any further.

Speaking of Wood and ethics violations, I wonder what the American Bar Association would say if someone were to tell them that Wood was hindering a police investigation. Because he is, and he could go to prison for it! Make no mistake: this is NO idle threat!
 
The black fibers were probably from whatever JonBenet was wiped down with, and if it happened to be JR's shirt, even that doesn't prove him involved. Anybody could have found it and used it.

The black shirt could have been retrieved from the dirty laundry basket in the basement, by whoever did this. Where JonBenet maybe got the "lint" on her feet, that ST mentioned.

Wasn't this a lovely weekend? And just a gentle reminder, not a criticizm, what in the world happened to yesterday's PR did it? Now are you saying JR? Neither of us really knows, of course.

I'll read back to where I left off last night to see if anyone had any opinion about the duffle bag in the crawl space, and what was in it.
 
Eagle1 said:
The black fibers were probably from whatever JonBenet was wiped down with, and if it happened to be JR's shirt, even that doesn't prove him involved. Anybody could have found it and used it.
Click to expand...
Good point, Eagle. The perp may've even done so deliberately to incriminate John and/or to force him into helping the perp with the cover-up and keep him involved in the cover-up indefinitely.
 
Britt said:
Good point, Eagle. The perp may've even done so deliberately to incriminate John and/or to force him into helping the perp with the cover-up and keep him involved in the cover-up indefinitely.
Click to expand...

Britt,

Does this point to Patsy wiping JonBenet down with JR's shirt since she also wiped the flashlight clean?

.
 
UKGuy said:
Does this point to Patsy wiping JonBenet down with JR's shirt since she also wiped the flashlight clean?
Click to expand...
Could be. Did she wipe her prints off the maglite and leave it on the counter hoping John would pick it up?
 
If John did wipe JonBenet down, then this might be consistent with a staging revision away from an Intruder scenario to a kidnap/ransom one.

But I'm not too convinced wrt these fibers, they may have been a ploy to influence John's testimony during his interviews?



.
 
"But I'm not too convinced wrt these fibers, they may have been a ploy to influence John's testimony during his interviews?"

Doubtful, UKGuy, for the reasons I gave above.

"The black fibers were probably from whatever JonBenet was wiped down with, and if it happened to be JR's shirt, even that doesn't prove him involved. Anybody could have found it and used it."

Anybody could have found it? You mean to suggest that someone broke into the house and was LOOKING for it? To what purpose? But you're right: it isn't a lead-pipe lock that he was involved. Still, it does cast the dark shadow on him, doesn't it?

"The black shirt could have been retrieved from the dirty laundry basket in the basement, by whoever did this. Where JonBenet maybe got the "lint" on her feet, that ST mentioned."

I don't even know if that shirt was washable. It might have been dry-clean only for all I know.

"Wasn't this a lovely weekend?"

No, Eagle1, it wasn't for me. Nothing to do with this, though.

"And just a gentle reminder, not a criticizm, what in the world happened to yesterday's PR did it?"

I'm still there. Don't know what that's supposed to suggest. I think the idea was to show that both parents were involved, thus both were involved with the cover-up. I really don't know one way or the other about that. All I can do is stick to facts.

"Now are you saying JR? Neither of us really knows, of course."

Eagle1, even I get confused sometimes.
 
A question about John Ramsey's black shirt - when was the last time he wore it? Was he wearing it that evening at the White's?
 
SuperDave said:
"The black fibers were probably from whatever JonBenet was wiped down with, and if it happened to be JR's shirt, even that doesn't prove him involved. Anybody could have found it and used it."

Anybody could have found it? You mean to suggest that someone broke into the house and was LOOKING for it? To what purpose? But you're right: it isn't a lead-pipe lock that he was involved. Still, it does cast the dark shadow on him, doesn't it?

"The black shirt could have been retrieved from the dirty laundry basket in the basement, by whoever did this. Where JonBenet maybe got the "lint" on her feet, that ST mentioned."

I don't even know if that shirt was washable. It might have been dry-clean only for all I know.
Click to expand...

Well if the fibers go beyond the consistent description to that of positive identification, then it will link John directly to the crime scene.

The dark-colored fibers were found in JonBenet's underwear and vaginal area along with flecks of blood, including birefringent foreign material which may have originated from the paintbrush handle? The fibers were from the same type of black wool shirt made in Israel that John wore to the Christmas dinner at the Whites. I dont think wool is so simple to wash unless its that special dry-clean wool?

Both Dr Meyer's analysis and that of Dr. Werner Spitz suggests the time of death to be approx 1am.

.
 
UKGuy said:
Well if the fibers go beyond the consistent description to that of positive identification, then it will link John directly to the crime scene.

The dark-colored fibers were found in JonBenet's underwear and vaginal area along with flecks of blood, including birefringent foreign material which may have originated from the paintbrush handle? The fibers were from the same type of black wool shirt made in Israel that John wore to the Christmas dinner at the Whites. I dont think wool is so simple to wash unless its that special dry-clean wool?

Both Dr Meyer's analysis and that of Dr. Werner Spitz suggests the time of death to be approx 1am.

.
Click to expand...

1 A.M. That's right.

I don't know about wool. I'd heard it was velvet.

In terms of fiber evidence, consistent is as close as it gets to positive ID, UKGuy. In other words, if the police say your fibers are consistent, you're in BIG trouble!
 
SuperDave said:
1 A.M. That's right.

I don't know about wool. I'd heard it was velvet.

In terms of fiber evidence, consistent is as close as it gets to positive ID, UKGuy. In other words, if the police say your fibers are consistent, you're in BIG trouble!
Click to expand...

SuperDave,
Steve Thomas in his book writes that fibers from the jacket Patsy had been wearing were found to be "chemically and microscopically consistent" which for me is stronger than simply being consistent.

And yes its black wool they sourced the manufacturer, expensive unusual shirt, so like Patsy's red jacket this links John to the crime-scene by a shirt he wore the night of Jonbenet's death.

And John's linking is even more serious than Patsy's since it suggests as I've speculated before that he was involved in the staging.

The shards of wood were discovered on the floor just outside of the wine-cellar door, along with Patsy's paint-tote, so this forensic evidence fits the theory that it was used for staging.

.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 202 more.
Total: 4,018 (members: 203, guests: 3,815)

Online statistics

Members online
203
Guests online
3,815
Total visitors
4,018
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,719
Messages
17,991,416
Members
229,217
Latest member
bgreen63
Back
Top