ReconDoc83,
1. Its not vitriol, they will be nice people just misinformed.
sorry, looks very vitriolic to me; as if a man, and then later his family who have been professionally investigating this crime for nearly 25 years...first hand might know more than those who simply want to “believe” that the Ramsey’s were involved based on a very long history of “hate rich white people”.
2. There is zero forensic evidence linking to anyone outside the Ramsey house, that includes the DNA.
wrong; the DNA report specifically notes that DNA found on the clothing, specifically the undergarments is directly linked to someone “other” than a family member.
as well the later 2008 documents also state clearly that no DNA evidence found on the clothing was linked to ANY Ramsey family member.
3. Might be true, but thats not the same as saying a Ramsey did not kill JonBenet.
sorry, but that is not how science nor evidence works. The lack of a fact is not an indication of guilt. You cannot prove a negative.
4. The ligature fibers will host touch-dna as will JonBenet's clothing. The clothing was sent for testing and not all the results have been published, i.e. Burke Ramsey's or John Ramsey's touch-dna deposits have not been ruled out with Status: Not Present.
actually that is exactly what has been proven; their DNA was not found on the tested items; specifically the undergarments where the semen / bodily fluids were recovered and tested.
you can in fact prove positives....positives are facts. The DNA was tested; it did not match ANY Ramsey family member...those are positive facts.
This is guaranteed to be a topic in future JonBenet documentaries once it is released.
another fact; that seems to not be mentioned anywhere. It is Colorado law since 1996; and updated in 2004, and 2008; and federal law since 1999, that any DNA collected from anyone in the course of a felony investigation has their DNA collected and uploaded to CODIS.
the insinuation that some previously captured / convicted serial killer was responsible for this crime is misguided and obtuse. If a previously known and apprehended serial attacker / rapist / killer captured after 1998 had been the culprit of this attack then CODIS DNA would have long ago implicated them in the crime.
the people who believe that a young Burke Ramsey was a sexual deviant, without any evidence; and then also believe he fashioned a garot with not only a broken paint brush that was used in multiple ways to violate and strangle this child is asinine. The knot in the rope was intricate and articulate; that isn’t the work of a child. And while her skull was fractured the autopsy clearly states that her strangulation was the cause of death.
there is no doubt she was subdued with a stun gun...anyone who has ever owned or carried one, especially in LEO or military service is trained in their use and placement for optimum exposure; and if you have ever been stunned with one...the marks that remain are long lasting, and sometimes permanent reminders.
the argument that either parent, or any parent, would need to subdue their 5yo child with a stun gun, not once, but twice, to force them to comply with their commands in the middle of the night is ridiculous. Not to mention the sadistic idea that either would sit around thinking about producing an elaborately knotted tool to garot their child.
I do find some things troubling; and again I find nowhere in documents that they have ever been answered.
Is there proof, data driven proof through logs that the alarm was actually set that night? Isn’t it possible that the intruder, which i firmly believe there was one, came in through an unlocked or unalarmed door / garage only exited through the basement window?
people have made a huge issue with “cobwebs”...but there were also no other debris either, no dirt, no leaves on the floor of the train room. So it is quite possible the impression of the shoe wasn’t left when the intruder entered...but when he left, which is also why the suitcase was there, to “boost up” into the window ledge.
As a military veteran who deployed numerous times in many locations and trained in many disciplines of defense and tactics... I look at those images and injuries and I keep coming back to one theory.
this intruder was likely military, possibly law enforcement, or a “wannabe” who used tools of opportunity, outside of the stun gun, to commit their acts. I believe the killer used a butt of a pistol to fracture her skull, though I see holes in my own hypothesis.
I cannot explain away the ransom note, or the ridiculous length of it; and I cannot actually explain the “reason” for killing her.
in context; you have stunned the child, she is unconscious, you have secured her hands and feet; she isn’t an escape risk; you have taped her mouth, she isn’t going to scream. Why crush her head? If it were a kidnapping why assault her in the home? Why not pick her up, take her out of the window, and carry her off?
I also wonder if the skull fracture was accidental from dropping her in the stairwell....but then why the garot?
look we have all seen programs and read stories about parents who kill their children; they smother them, they manually choke them, they drown them, they set their houses on fire, they poison them.....but I have never heard of a parent who uses a garot to strangle their child.
Anyway....I have Rambled on long enough.
