BREAKING NEWS: New DNA Analysis Suggests Family Should NOT Have Been Cleared

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Bumpity bump
 
kanzz said:
Especially for newcomers, I thought I'd share a link to some of the old WS threads about Mary Lacy. They provide a lot of background info.
[My intent is not to dig up these old threads to boost them, but just to offer them as reference.]

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/search.php?searchid=6292293
Click to expand...

Oops. Link doesn't work. Since the news of the shocking and chilling butt print came out, I'm trying to determine how Lacy got to be DA in 2001. Did Hunter recommend her? Did she run on a platform which included a promise of pursuing justice for JBR?
 
cattlekate said:
Oops. Link doesn't work. Since the news of the shocking and chilling butt print came out, I'm trying to determine how Lacy got to be DA in 2001. Did Hunter recommend her? Did she run on a platform which included a promise of pursuing justice for JBR?
Click to expand...
Oh my. That's a shame. The link was to my search results for just the forum titles containing "Mary Lacy". I thought it might be helpful to others as well, but maybe it is user specific, IDK. The Boulder County District Attorney is an elected position.
 
Surprised this thread is not garnering more attention, or maybe I am missing something? Has it just been argued at length that Mary Lacy had no business doing what she did.
 
So glad that all of this is finally coming to light. It is time for Justice.
It seems to be rapidly unfolding actually. IMHO this was all done with Justice for JonBenet in mind.
LW has touted for years that ML exonerated his clients years ago with DNA evidence. Wonder what straws he will grasp at now to defend them?
This new (well new to us, not ML) evidence that the DNA was a composite and not a complete DNA profile of one individual as previously stated.
Eye opening honestly. How many other things were twisted to work in favor of the Ramsey's?
I think in my humble opinion that many experts and people on the inside have worked behind the scenes to put together this case so that the public will
be aware of the injustice done to JonBenet.
LW and the Ramsey's should be worried now. The truth is coming out. You can only hide from it for so long before it comes back to bite you.
I think we may have to be very patient as the news will trickle out now as more is brought to light. We've waited 20 years to see this day. I don't know about yall but
a few more weeks or months won't bother me if we have to wait for everything to come out.
As long as Justice is sought and found for JonBenet. Finally that sweet precious child is getting the answers she deserves.
It's truly sad that strangers had to bring this to light and the family only wanted to hide it.
Money and status can carry you pretty far but eventually you come down from that mountain.
I want to see these professionals that have allowed this to occur be made to answer for their actions.
So happy for JonBenet!!!
 
cattlekate said:
Oops. Link doesn't work. Since the news of the shocking and chilling butt print came out, I'm trying to determine how Lacy got to be DA in 2001. Did Hunter recommend her? Did she run on a platform which included a promise of pursuing justice for JBR?
Click to expand...
OK. Let's try this another way. Here are the individual links to the threads. I hope someone finds this helpful.

Recalling Mary Lacy
Started by Nedthan Johns, 07-21-2008 04:01 PM

Mary Lacy releases a new exoneration letter?
Started by cynic, 10-18-2009 03:10 PM

Fox Cable The Line up Oct.28th Bolder DA Mary Lacy
Started by CW, 10-28-2006 11:45 PM

Judge Roxanne Baylin, D.A. Mary Lacy, Professor Tracey, All Need To Go!
Started by Tricia, 09-11-2006 04:15 PM

In Defense of Mary Lacy
Started by FactorFiction, 08-29-2006 09:51 AM

I suspect Mary Lacy's career will be over soon
Started by GuruJosh, 08-17-2006 05:49 PM
 
Thanks for the links kanzz, I'll definitely check them out. Angelainwi, there has been a lot of discussion about this development in the 7 days of JonBenet/DNA thread but I didn't realize this thread existed. Oops!

Cattlekate, ML was one of Hunter's deputy DAs when he was in office and she always believed in the intruder theory. I just read this a few minutes ago about ML in Tom Miller's account of the Ramsey case and thought I'd share it:
As Hunter’s political career died, another district attorney, Mary Keenan Lacy, was elected to his office. Asked about the case during her first campaign, Lacy refused to comment on the “ongoing” investigation. Once in office, the wolf shed her clothing.

Not only did Lacy ignore “the parents did it” theory, but she publicly endorsed the intruder theory with so loud and shrill a voice that none who would breathe a word against John and Patsy could be heard, or find much empathy or promotions within her office. To add insult to Boulder’s already embarrassed police force, she hired none other than the retired Lou Smit to spearhead her Ramsey investigation. By that calculated act, she curried the favor of John and Patsy and disemboweled the threatened civil lawsuit by the Ramseys’ famous junkyard lawyer from Atlanta should her office rile his famously unindicted clients.
Click to expand...
I thought it was interesting that he mentioned how she treated anyone in the DAs office who wasn't pro-intruder theory. He wrote this years ago and it completely gels with the reports only recently coming out from former employees. It's the end of chapter 4, I wonder if chapter 5 will delve into ML like the previous chapters did AH.
http://www.tommillerlaw.com/jonbenet-ramsey/chapter-4-machiavellis-circus/
 
DrollForeignFaction said:
Thanks for the links kanzz, I'll definitely check them out. Angelainwi, there has been a lot of discussion about this development in the 7 days of JonBenet/DNA thread but I didn't realize this thread existed. Oops!

Cattlekate, ML was one of Hunter's deputy DAs when he was in office and she always believed in the intruder theory. I just read this a few minutes ago about ML in Tom Miller's account of the Ramsey case and thought I'd share it:

I thought it was interesting that he mentioned how she treated anyone in the DAs office who wasn't pro-intruder theory. He wrote this years ago and it completely gels with the reports only recently coming out from former employees. It's the end of chapter 4, I wonder if chapter 5 will delve into ML like the previous chapters did AH.
http://www.tommillerlaw.com/jonbenet-ramsey/chapter-4-machiavellis-circus/
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link to Tom Miller's online book. I hadn't read it yet, and I'm glad to have something new to read.
 
Don't forget what Gordon Coombes said.

I was told when I went to the DA’s office, ‘Don’t voice against the intruder theory because you may be forced out if you don’t fall in line. If you don’t believe in it, just keep your mouth shut,'” Coombes, who worked under the D.A. between 2008 and 2011, told the New York Post. “It just seemed weird the whole premise of … this attempt to influence the entire agency.”
Click to expand...


http://radaronline.com/videos/jonbenet-ramsey-american-murder-mystery-investigation-discovery-documentary-dna-evidence/

He's the one who admitted DNA got mishandled.

They had deviated and dropped down to four markers as opposed to the standard [13]” usually used in forensic analysis,” noted Coombes.
Click to expand...


Time to bury any IDI notion. It's deader 'n a doornail
 
Disgusted said:
Boom. Could it all be starting to unravel, finally?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-traces-multiple-people-victim-s-clothes.html

http://nypost.com/2016/10/28/new-dna-twist-in-jonbenet-ramsey-murder/

http://www.torontosun.com/2016/10/28/report-claims-da-was-too-quick-to-clear-jonbenet-ramseys-family
Click to expand...


I'm sorry I don't understand how DNA works. If the sample is made up of two or three people is it beyond the ability to identify it? If PR JR or BR's DNA is in it can they single it out and identify it?
 
I don't see how, after twenty years but then again really cold cases have been solved IIRC.

I guess it depends on the condition of the DNA.

Dr. Lee said everything needs to be retested with today's standards and I agree. A new Grand Jury too.
 
Duchess518 said:
I'm sorry I don't understand how DNA works. If the sample is made up of two or three people is it beyond the ability to identify it? If PR JR or BR's DNA is in it can they single it out and identify it?
Click to expand...
I think the best way to explain it is this. Hope this makes sense Duchess!
Imagine if you will partial pieces of DNA samples stacked on top of each other using clear sheets of glass. If you looked from above the stack, it might seem to be a complete profile. Yet when you take the sheets of glass apart you realize there is barely any DNA- on each sheet. Each DNA- partial is not a complete profile at all and very degraded. Meaning very old. But if you laid the sheets of partial DNA- from different people on top of each other, it could appear it was a complete profile. You remember those overhead projectors that teachers used with the clear sheets to work math problems out on? Imagine several stacked and put on the overhead.
Hope that makes some kind of sense? Haha! Now I'm confused myself!

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
Also there wasn't enough markers in any of the profiles to enter into the system. I think it requires 13 markers to put in the system?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
PositiveLight said:
Also there wasn't enough markers in any of the profiles to enter into the system. I think it requires 13 markers to put in the system?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If it's from a crime scene, the minimum is 10. 13 is the usual standard. Now it doesn't even meet that. (I'm not sure it ever did: the submitted profile in 2003 was more like 9-1/2 than 10 anyway.)
 
angelainwi said:
Surprised this thread is not garnering more attention, or maybe I am missing something? Has it just been argued at length that Mary Lacy had no business doing what she did.
Click to expand...

I'm mostly a lurker, but I get the sense this info has already been disseminated to the other threads on the case and incorporated into the discussion. (There are, unfortunately, a LOT of threads and most of them contain roughly the same convos right now.)
 
ArianeEmory is right. There are multiple discussions on multiple subjects dispersed throughout these threads. I think this DNA news has been mentioned in three or four of them.
 
Don't forget that we have Mary Lacy to thank for the John Mark Karr fiasco!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 77 more.
Total: 2,079 (members: 78, guests: 2,001)

Online statistics

Members online
78
Guests online
2,001
Total visitors
2,079
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,388
Messages
18,107,947
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top