Are the Ramseys involved or not?
- Thread starter Britt
- Start date
New Posts
-
MT MT - Glen Allen Walls, 17, Malmstrom Air Force Base, 10 Oct 1972
- Latest: victoriarobinson642
-
Identified! FL - Crescent Beach, WhtFem UP3036, 30-50, burr holes in skull, Apr'85 - Mary Alice Pultz
- Latest: I am not Sherlock H.
- Status
Absolutely...lol..I have found experts who think she wrote that note including people who analyze more than just the handwriting. Look at that note..you don't have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows. Explain the note...when you can do that you will crack the case...i did it..and i know who the killer is. She is in the grave now..and her initials were PR. Explain that silly, clearly patsy ramsey note. It was not written by some imaginary sexual pervert or some small foreign faction whatever that is..it was written by patsy to deceive and in my opinion more than the police John was her first target to fool. Not to sound sexist..but no man would have allowed that note to be written and only a very naive woman would have written such a note. All the other evidence can not even be proven to be related to this case..footprints, palm prints even specks of dna can last for decades...but that note was written by the killer...all the rest is a maybe...i remember the dna evidence was miniscule to the point it could be totally unrelated..if there was substantial evidence of skin or blood of another thats all this case would be about..but that pointing to the dna evidence has been mainly done by ramsey advocates..but you can believe what you want...and i will believe what i want. I just want you to explain the note...who do you think wrote it and why?
thanks i will take a look.
You do realize your "denials" come from the suspects themselves, don't you? Completely worthless.
LS believed the Rs were innocent because they were Christians. Hardly indicative of true investigative genius.
Lots of Christians commit crimes.
Prove it. That's what I have noticed about you Dee Dee, you make a lot claims but you never provide links to back it up. Why didn't the bpd counter those claims? Because they couldn't, plain and simple.
explain that note..its not written by a man, nor a sophisticated criminal..just a woman who knows very little about kidnappings, foreign factions, but perhaps a journalism major...some naive woman, who send her prepubescient girl to be in beauty contests dressed as a woman...almost gentile in one sense but trying to sound tough...you got to face the facts..men don't write like that. it would have been a simple..we got your daughter, don't call the police or we kill her..we want 2 million dollars we will call you tomorrow with instructions. not some long letter about how to get the money, what to carry it in, make sure and get some rest, and the constant threats over and over again...now perhaps a very feminine man would have written it...maybe..but we do not have one in this story...now do we? go back and look at my earlier post..there is a link to a fbi profiler who agrees with me to some extent..though i found that link just recently and i have believed in my theory since 1997. who and what do you think wrote that silly note?
Again Mike, I will agree with experts in the case on this one, and say the intruder wrote the note. Why? Only god and the perp knows. Patsy was given a 4.5 likelihood 5 eliminating her. I am not going to pretend I know what goes on in the mind of child killer, and speculate why he wrote the note. I am extremely suspicious of the late Michael Helegoth and his hat with the letters SBTC, his stun gun and his Hi Tech boots. Also his actions before and after the murder. The RN had a lot of movie references in it, movies I highly doubt PR even watched.
I am not sure which experts you rely on, but when someone is using printing and trying to hide their writing then i doubt anyone could ever be sure. Never heard about movie references only a book reference. Don't know anything about Helegoth...I come back to the note again..do you think the note was a real ransom note? if you do then we have nothing to discuss..if you don't then you have to admit its staging..what is staging...setting up the scene to appear what it is not. So if we can agree the note was to make the crime appear like a kidnapping then you must ask who needs to stage a crime..people who stage crimes are trying to hide their connection to the victim..a stranger has no connection and needs no staging. If an intruder sex offender commited the crime he would have not taken the time to stage a kidnapping or robbery or any other crime..there is no connection between strangers. the other aspects of the crime we can debate were staging..i think the garrote was staging..or was the murder weapon not sure. I have read many websites on this crime over the years..not really any books...but i can't tell you which are good references and which are trying to manipulate. You need to ask yourself, who would need to make people think its a kidnapping?..but also ask yourself who would need to convince john it was a kidnapping.?.who would write a note to john and only john? Look at this link...I know nothing about the profiler other than what is said on the link...tell me what you think....
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/8/28/193035.shtml
Mike- the fact that you don't know anything about Helegoth or the movie references in the ransom note speaks volumes about how much you know about the case. Do you just read RDI theories? I read both and then form my opinion. Lou Smit was a big one for me, the man was a freaking genius in his field, 200 for 200 what makes everyone think he was wrong this time?? What would he have to gain? Nothing. BPD on the other hand were far from experts when it came to murder investigations, Hell they even admit they screwed up!
Saw both of those movies, don't remember those lines..will take your word for it..but that does not eliminate patsy..remember she is pretending to be tough so grabbing those lines from a movie might be in line with my theory..plus i think the woman was under the influence of drugs and alcohol. i did google that dude and i remember him, just not the name....he was smeared by the ramsey team..i cannot find any official record of the sbtc hat at all..just posts like this forum repeating something they heard..i will work on it some more later but if they had that much evidence i am sure that would be a major headline. There is too much misinfo on this case masquerading as fact. some of your facts are in dispute i noticed as i researched a little tonight..the dna at the two locations do not match each other..in one is midicondrial(sp) and sex cannot be determined for example. Nobody will ever convince me patsy did not write that note...even a confession by someone else would be suspect. look forward to more debate. time for bed.
DNA matches in 3 locations, under nails, sides of long johns and commingled with blood in her underwear, these are indeed facts and I have provided links. Also don't take my word regarding movie lines in the RN, that info is also in my links.
. Back to this debate 2morrow lol!Junebug99,
The touch-dna is a red-herring. Also you have failed to tell us if there is Ramsey dna on the clothing, or any other items found at the crime-scene? Never mind if the recorded touch-dna was also found anywhere else at the crime-scene?
Why is this important? Because, like the Ramsey fibers, it would indeed corroborate claims of an intruder, sadly none has been reported leaving the Ramsey fibers standing out.
You make an elementary mistake in reasoning to assume touch-dna discovered at the crime-scene demonstrates that an intruder killed JonBenet.
The touch-dna may have arrived on JonBenet's person during the post-mortem process, maybe it belongs Coroner Meyer, or the person who removed JonBenet's clothing for the autopsy? Maybe it was transferred from Bloomingdales pack of underwear when they were placed on JonBenet, maybe when JonBenet visited the toilet at the White's party it was transferred from the door handle, the flushing handle, wash basin handle, or side of the toilet bowl? Maybe on the way home, whilst delivering gifts, she used a toilet or handled something contaminated with the touch-dna?
There are so many maybe's and only one involves an intruder, also there is no other corroborating forensic evidence, demonstrating that the touch-dna does indeed represent that of an intruder.
So until the touch-dna is matched to someone and that this person is not eliminated due to accidental environmental transfer then you have no forensic evidence linking to any intruder at all!
If you return and read your own post you might notice that similar to Patsy's interview no explanation is offered for the forensic evidence discovered at the crime-scene. Just lots of righteous indignation and bluster.
The one place where forensic evidence should not be found, linking a Ramsey to the crime-scene, is on JonBenet's genital area, beneath her size-12 underwear.
Why are you so concerned with the touch dna which you say has three site depositions, yet completely disregard far more numerous fiber site depositions, does that tell us something about your bias or intellectual capacity, or both?
.
Why has the touch DNA cleared people? If it's not reliable evidence they wouldn't clear so many people based on it. JMK freaking confessed and was cleared because his DNA wasn't a match. Why was there only Red fibers? She had on a black and grey sweater, why no fibers from them? What about the fibers found not linked to anything in the house? Your so Hell bent on the fibers proving guilt, explain those. We really don't know if the fibers have been linked to John or not. Cops lie if they think it will get their suspects to confess. On top of that, no forensic criminalist is going to get on the stand and state that any fibers came from specific items unless those items are so differentiated from other similar fibers as to make them unique. It was Christmas, Patsy is not the only person wearing a red sweater, and unless she had on a one of kind sweater no one can say 100% that they came from PR's sweater.
It was tested against the several people in the BPD, and in the coroners office. The fact that it was under her fingernails, on both sides of her long johns where they would be pulled down and commingled with blood in her underwear, plus the bpd have cleared people based on it tells me the DNA evidence it's a lot more important than you RDI theorist care to admit.
- Status