Evidence that point away from the Ramsey's

[Nedthan Johns]

. I went back into the train room, showed Fleet the broken window, explained to him that I might have broken it myself months ago. I showed him the suitcase that I saw under the window, which I felt was very out of place. We looked for any large pieces of broken glass. And then I got up and went to the cellar room, opened the door, and found JonBenet.

Ned: This statement above is truly telling. John states I might have broken it myself months ago. Now who the heck forgets breaking a window??? What does might have mean? You either did or you didn’t. He also makes it a point of stating the suitcase looked very out of place. Makes me wonder how often John Ramsey was in the basement and how many men notice things out of place in a basement that cluttered?

 

[Nedthan Johns]

This is absolutely speculation, but I've always been curious about this - I saw several pictures of that window well, with a garden hose laying on part of the window grate, and the gas grill partially "parked" on it. (that's not the spec part, that part is fact) I wonder if he was getting antsy when the body wasn't found - whether he did it or Patsy did it, he had to know the body was in that basement, and decided to open that window - he looked out and up the window well, and thought that maybe it didn't seem to be such a good idea to make it look like a point of entry or exit, because of the stuff on the grate, (besides which he couldn't be sure what French had seen) and then closed it again. He couldn't have known whether someone had been looking outside from upstairs and had seen him open/close the window, so he made up a story if he was asked, and decided not to try to bull Arndt when he went back upstairs. There is just something so incredibly dumb about him entering the house that summer through that window when he claimed he lost his keys. Why didn't he get the one from the neighbor or use his garage door opener, after all, didn't he use the garage xmas night? I just have a hard time picturing a guy in a business suit, a dress shirt, tie and wingtips climbing down and through that dirty window well. - the window story didn't make sense to begin with - and another thing, how many guys keep their house key on another ring beside their carkey ring?

Ned: How’d did I miss this wealth of information from this past thread. Incredible. I never looked at it this way. He back peddled and if this is true regarding the window this clearly IMPLICATES John Ramsey in this crime prior to the 911 call because this PROVES he already knew JB was down there. I mean seriously WHO wouldn’t report an open window when your child is supposedly missing?? One can say he wasn’t in the right mind frame, but then how does that describe is non challant attitude while going out and getting his mail and flipping through envelopes?

 

[Nedthan Johns]

I am reposting this because of its significance:

BASEMENT WINDOW TIMELINE

6:05 AM: Officer Rick French, the first police officer to arrive at the house, goes into the basement by himself to look for a possible point of entry for the kidnapper and to make sure the kidnapper wasn't in the basement. He found neither. However, we don't know what French's written police report says about the broken window, if anything. (NOT LIKELY THE FIRST RESPOINDING OFFICER WOULD NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT AN OPEN WINDOW)

Remember the 911 call was at 5:50AM and John Ramsey said he hadn’t searched for JB yet.

6:20 AM: Fleet White, the first civilian to arrive at the house, goes into the basement by himself to search for JonBenet, calling out her name as he searches. He notices and inspects the broken window glass but notes nothing about the window being open. However, he believes the window may not have been latched. Fleet continues his search and opens the white door to wine cellar, looks into the darkened room, but sees nothing. (DID HE REPORT THE OPEN WINDOW AT THAT TIME?)

10:00 AM: John Ramsey allegedly sneaks downstairs by himself without being seen (everyone had been told to stay in the sun room) and finds the window open by about 1/8 inch, closes and latches it, and goes back upstairs without telling anyone. Contradictorily, John's own stated purpose for going into the basement at that time was to try to find a point of entry for an intruder, yet he stayed quiet after allegedly finding one. (BINGO) Proves his direct involvement in this crime. Now how the heck did I miss all this before. This makes me re-think the whole crime and now proves to me that John Ramsey was DIRECTLY involved and this wasn’t just a cover up. Adds up with the fact that he didn’t try and resesitate his child when he first found her and they way he carried her up the stairs holding her away from his body.

1:05 PM: John Ramsey and Fleet White, upon the suggestion of Detective Linda Arndt, go into the basement together to look for anything that seems to be out of place. They were told to not touch anything. They checked the broken basement window and continued their search until they got to the white door to the wine cellar. John opened the door, found JonBenet on the floor only a few feet from the door, picked her up and carried her upstairs.

4/30/97: John Ramsey, during the police interviews, for the first time reveals that he had been in the basement at about 10:00 on the morning of the murder and had found the basement window open, and had closed it, and latched it. John is the only person who had seen the window open.

John's story contradicts what both Officer Rick French and Fleet White saw in that neither of them reported anything about the window being open. An open window would have been blockbuster information and they would have immediately reported it.

John's story is also contradicted by his assertion that he had to remove a chair and some boxes away from the trainroom door before being able to enter. French and White had been into the trainroom prior to Ramsey's alleged entry into the room, and they weren't blocked by a chair and boxes. It strongly suggests that Ramsey had been in the basement BEFORE the 911 call was made, even though he denies it.

Ned: BlueCrab well done. You have absolutely convinced me of JR’s involvement in this crime and that the intruder theory is “out the window” pun intended.

 

[PagingDrDetect]

This is a very good point and I have no idea which way the door opened. However, in the quote posted by Wolkpack, John talks about the things blocking the door as something that was familiar to him. He was not surprised to come across these things blocking the door. It seems that the blockage was already there before Christmas (maybe related to Christmas). In that case and assuming that the door opened inward as you say, an intruder came through the window, opened the door to leave the train room and found it blocked. He moved some things away, and went on with the horrible act of killing and molesting JB. Then, he goes back into the train room and before escaping from a murder scene he stops to put the boxes and stuff back in front of the door, closes the door and crawls out through a tiny window. It IS possible, but not very logical. I can't think of any good reason to take time to reblock the door.

No, you don't understand. The only way to get into the part of the basement where JBR was found is either from the floor above and going through the door with the chair in front of it or through the window that they're talking about the possibility of an entrance/exit point. If you got into the house through that window you'd have to open that door to go up to the next floor but the chair blocking the door was on the OPPOSITE side of the door if you are already in the part of the basement where JBR was found. Imagine yourself standing at a closed door and there is a chair you can't see is there on the opposite side. You couldn't use that window as the exit point because you can't put the chair BACK in front of that door when you're already on the other side of it. JR said there was also boxes and other things he had to move as well as the chair. JR's excuse for all that stuff being back in front of that door if an intruder used that window is basically "magic"... he has no explanation because it couldn't have been done.

Here's and excerpt from JR's '98 transcript about that, but you should read the whole thing because they discuss this throughout in depth...

1 LOU SMIT: The thing I'm trying to figure
2 out in my mind then is, if an intruder went
3 through the door, he'd almost have to pull the
4 chair behind him.
5 JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah. That's correct.
6
7 LOU SMIT: Because that would have been
8 his exit?
9 JOHN RAMSEY: Right.
10 LOU SMIT: Okay.
11 JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah. It was blocked. He'd
12 have to move something to get into the room.
13 LOU SMIT: And he would have had to move
14 it back, if he was in there trying to get out, is
15 that correct?
16 JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah.
17 LOU SMIT: So that's not very logical as
18 far as --
19 JOHN RAMSEY: I think it is. I mean if this
20 person is that bizarrely clever to have not left
21 any good evidence, but left all these little funny
22 little clues around, they certain are clever
23 enough to pull the chair back when they left.
24 LOU SMIT: But it was your impression that
25 that chair was blocking that door?
0283
1 JOHN RAMSEY: Right. The chair and something
2 else. But it certainly wasn't the Easter baskets.
3 They were sitting there on the drum table. So I
4 never touched them. I just moved the chair and
5 went in.

Here's a really good floor plan of all the floors of the house...
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer2/primer10_blue.html

 

[PagingDrDetect]

Ned: That’s not the glass I am talking about. I am talking about the tiny piece of glass photographed on top of the suit case that Lou Smit believed was left by the intruder’s shoe as he stepped on it and out the window. I have seen the crime scene photos and that IS glass on top of the suitcase. How did it get there?

Read all the transcripts. Patsy explained in her interviews that JR did indeed break that window himself months before when he locked himself out. JR was positive about this himself in either the '97 or '98 interview explaining how he stripped to his underwear to crawl through the window. JR also says that him and Fleet White crawled about on the floor looking for pieces of glass, one or two pieces were found on the floor, and he can't remember where they put them. Both JR and Fleet were in that basement together and both in it separately that morning. Fleet admitted to moving that suitcase, and JR said in one of his interviews that he can't remember if it was Fleet that moved it or himself. JR also says in the '98 interview that he believed that the piece of glass they found on the floor was from when JR broke that window himself. The glass piece got on the suitcase because either Fleet or JR put it there. You'll notice that the only person claiming there was a chunk of glass on the suitcase is Lou Smit... JR himself never said that.

Ned: Not very likely that sound made it all the way next door unless those cans were by the vent in the boiler room, I believe the paint cans were in the windowless room.

Where the paint cans were are only steps away from the boiler room and the duct to the outside. If the cans were moved while the door to the wine cellar was opened there would be no problem hearing it outside. Besides, there was a spiderweb on the grate that was attached to the brick that it sat on and it was undisturbed. They even consulted a spider expert to see how fast the web could have been spun, and that expert (THE top spider expert apparently) said it was a funnel web or some such thing that couldn't have been made that fast.

But what it all comes down to is the photo of that window showing all that undisturbed dirt on the sill... even Smit couldn't demonstrate any way to get through that window without dragging your bum across the sill effectively wiping off the dirt.

 

[s_finch]

Why should we take JR's word for it? We don't know the door was blocked, it's just JR telling us it was.

Yes, buy by him telling us that the door was blocked, he effectively cut out any possiblity that an intruder came through that window. Although in a later interview, (Atlanta 2000??) JR is so desperate that he actually states that he believes someone could have pulled the chair and boxes close to the door, from the other side of the door, AFTER having closed it.

As our newcomer, Plenum, has pointed out, the R's were initially casting suspicion towards someone with a key. They only resorted to the window/intruder theory when the LE didn't run off after the housekeeper and all the rest of Boulder who had a key.

Seems to me the R's never thought they'd be suspected so they weren't so worried about a POE or framing anyone in particular. I think they misjudged this part just a little.

 

[Chrishope]

Yes, buy by him telling us that the door was blocked, he effectively cut out any possiblity that an intruder came through that window. ...

There are many good reasons to doubt the intruder theory, but IMO, statements made by JR are not among them. As someone else pointed out, his story of the door being blocked works against the intruder theory. It may well be he was making that statement early on when still trying to implicate someone with a key.

My point is simply that we have no reason to take his statement as fact. The door might have been blocked, then again, it might not have been. We simply don't know. This seems to be one of the few statements by JR that RDIs take at face value. Truth is, we simply don't know.

I eliminate the window as POE for other reasons. I don't eliminate it based on JR's statements. This is the same guy who "found" a window unlatched but forgot to tell the police - until four months later.

 

[s_finch]

As Ned points out

French and White had been into the trainroom prior to Ramsey's alleged entry into the room, and they weren't blocked by a chair and boxes.

:banghead: Why didn't this dawn on me before?? This doesn't make any sense whatsoever. I know JR didn't know Fleet had been down there alone, but surely he knew French had been down there. Did he think French wouldn't remember having to move boxes to get into the train room???

 

[Eagle1]

I remember that FW said he moved the suitcase to under the window (why there?) and picked up some glass and put on it.

Was he himself beginning to stage what might look to some like a point of entry? Why were he and JR collaborating about the window, that they'd broken it, put the suitcase there, etc. ? Did someone who they knew actually enter there or was Smit jumping to conclusions based on appearances they'd jointly altered? What would tie them to the possible killer, so that they'd all cover for him? There had to be something they had in common.

Why would FW help stage the suitcase/broken glass scene if he wasn't somehow involved? Only because he and JR were still friends until the police told FW he'd been "thrown under the bus"? At the Rs' party on the 23rd, FW had pretended his mother was hospitalized and that he made the interrupted 911 call. Had he grabbed the phone away from (molested) JBR? What was Susan Stine's role besides getting rid of police w/out letting them see anyone, and why was that apparently important to her?

 

[leighl]

http://www.courttv.com/talk/chat_transcripts/2001/0202lee.html



tweety34286 asks: Regarding the JonBenet Ramsey case, as we all know it wasn't investigated properly. Who do you believe could do this to a little girl?

Dr. Henry Lee: It's a good question. Because what's the public perception and the reality are a little apart. The public perception will come from reading the newspaper or watching talk shows. What happened with the JonBenet Ramsey case, what happened in the first six hours, is that the police treated it like a kidnapping case. The crime scene wasn't thoroughly searched. In six hours, things can be changed, physical evidence can be lost or contaminated. That created problems later for the investigators who investigated the case because the body wasn't discovered right away and, later, Mr. Ramsey found the body himself and carried the body from the basement to the upstairs living room. So we generally try to look at the scene and say whether it's an outdoor or indoor scene, and we also want to know whether it's a primary scene or a secondary scene. Primary, meaning that the crime was committed in that particular location. If we can find out where the primary location is, then you can recover more evidence. So in this case, because of the initial six hours lost, investigators subsequently developed some difficulty in looking at the original location. Also, the body was carried by the victim's father, so there was this cross-contamination of trace evidence, which created problems later on. And there were other friends and relatives visiting the scene during those six hours.

Dr. Henry Lee: There are many theories about the suspect of the case. It boils down to two major groups, either a family member or an unknown intruder. I would say that we should keep our minds completely open, let the evidence speak for itself. We cannot come up with a tunnel vision or a hypothesis and then use the evidence to build a case. We should let the evidence itself make the case. Some of this evidence is still being investigated by the Colorado Bureau of Investigations lab and the FBI lab and the Boulder police department.

 

[leighl]

It has not been established as fact that the marks on JB are not from a stun gun.

Nedthans Johns (or anyone else who can answer this question), where does your information about the stun gun that "even the manufacture discounted them" come from?

The Boulder ME states very clearly,
MIKE DOBERSEN - "My experiments, and the observations that we made and all the work that's been done, I feel that I can testify to a reasonably degree of medical certainty that these are stun gun injuries."
-----------------------------
Excerpt taken from The Elite, JonBenet, A Second Look, which aired Nov. 7, 2002.

NARRATOR - Smit discovered how she was taken while pursuing another problem - the cause of marks on her back and face which the autopsy report described as "unexplained abrasions".


LOU SMIT - We were pretty sure that these injuries were not on JonBenét beforehand because pictures were taken of her earlier that day. So these injuries occurred right at or about the time of death so we had to find out what these marks were.

NARRATOR - The explanation came when he and a lawyer in the DA's office, by chance, put these two photographs together.



LOU SMIT - Suddenly it became apparent that the marks themselves, both on the back and on the face, were the same distance apart. Suddenly a little light went on and it was just like, wait a minute, and we both hit on it at the same time, that it was a stun gun.

NARRATOR - Smit looked for other murder cases where a stun gun had been used and found Gerald Boggs. These photos show the injuries made by the weapon in the Boggs case.



LOU SMIT - They compared very closely with the same marks on JonBenét. In fact the marks were on the same side of the face and it was a large mark and a small mark. The reason that happens that way is because if contact of the stun gun is placed
directly against the skin, it leaves a smaller mark But if the other contact is left off the skin just a little bit, the arc of electricity dances around on the skin causing the larger mark.

NARRATOR - Smit also identified the particular weapon which he believed caused these injuries.



LOU - The stun gun that we came up with is this one and its the Air Taser stun gun. If a stun gun is used on a little girl I'm sure it would have knocked her flat and it would have allowed the killer to take her from her bed without her struggling

NARRATOR - The Boulder police rejected Smit's evidence about a stun gun. They spoke to Colorado's leading expert, pathologist Mike Dobersen, and claimed he discounted the possibility.

MIKE DOBERSEN - That's right - and that was something of a mistatement since my real conclusion was that I couldn't, at that time, say whether this was a stun gun injury or not because we had to have a weapon to compare it to.

NARRATOR - When Smit showed him the Air Tazer stun gun, Doberson took a different position.

MIKE DOBERSEN - Lou had found a weapon with characteristics which fit as exactly as you could expect, the injuries on JonBenét's body.

NARRATOR - Since then, Mike Dobersen has conducted experiments on anaesthetized pigs. The Tazer stun gun exactly replicated the injuries on JonBenét and the distance, 3.5 centimeters, between those injuries.

MIKE DOBERSEN - My experiments, and the observations that we made and all the work that's been done, I feel that I can testify to a reasonably degree of medical certainty that these are stun gun injuries.

LOU - If a stun gun is used, it is an incredible clue left behind by the killer. It's not often that he leaves a good clue like this, but just to disregard it, would be incredibly foolish. Because if a stun gun is used on JonBenét, it points directly at an intruder. It does not point at a parent.

NARRATOR - What happened next to JonBenét is clear.

LOU SMIT - We're fairly certain that JonBenét was taken from her room down this spiral staircase. There was garland on the
railing of the spiral staircase and there was also garland found in the hair and on the clothing of JonBenét. We know that the killer
brought JonBenét down into this basement, there's no doubt about that, and we found some very significant evidence in this room.

NARRATOR: Smit says in the room in the basement where there was evidence of a break-in, something elsesignificant was found.

LOU SMIT - There were items in that suitcase which contained fibers which were found on the outside of the clothing of JonBenét. Is it possible that her killer tried to put JonBenét in that suitcase? Is it possible that he tried to take her out this window
in this suitcase? Could it have been a kidnapping followed by a murder? Very easily it could have been. Perhaps he had intended to take JonBenét out that window and he just couldn't get her out, and he decided to kill her. NARRATOR - When Smit presented his evidence to the Boulder police, they rejected it. Lead detective Steve Thomas said the intruder was 'non-existent' and the idea of a stun gun 'preposterous'. While Smit's findings were kept confidential,...

 

[leighl]

"When you look at the injuries on the front of JonBenét's neck, you can see the amount of force that was exerted on that garrotte, that a man pulled that handle, because it abraded the skin all the way up into the furrow of that garrotte...
But the most significant part of this particular photograph is that there's half moon abrasions direction above the ligature. These most likely are fingernail marks where JonBenét was trying to get the garrotte from her neck. She tried to save her own life. She tried everything she could to scream and to get away from that. And whoever did that to JonBenét had to see her doing this and
feel her doing this to try to get that garrotte off of her neck. This is a very brutal killing. Nothing in the family background would indicate to me that they're this brutal a people at all, not even for one night." Lou Smit

"In February, 1999, Michael Kane, now running the Grand Jury, wrote to Smit. He told him that his request to give evidence to the Grand Jury 'is denied'. At the same time, Kane issued an injunction against Smit. It demanded the surrender of all his evidence and sought court permission to 'permanently erase' it."

[Again from the Elite transcript quoted above in previous post.]

We the general public know only that which we are allowed to know through the media, perhaps there is so little evidence in support of an intruder because such information was ignored.

 

[twinkiesmom]

I thought the window with the grate was the room adjacent to the one where her body was found.

 

[rashomon]

"When you look at the injuries on the front of JonBenét's neck, you can see the amount of force that was exerted on that garrotte, that a man pulled that handle, because it abraded the skin all the way up into the furrow of that garrotte...
But the most significant part of this particular photograph is that there's half moon abrasions direction above the ligature. These most likely are fingernail marks where JonBenét was trying to get the garrotte from her neck. She tried to save her own life. She tried everything she could to scream and to get away from that. And whoever did that to JonBenét had to see her doing this and
feel her doing this to try to get that garrotte off of her neck. This is a very brutal killing. Nothing in the family background would indicate to me that they're this brutal a people at all, not even for one night." Lou Smit

"In February, 1999, Michael Kane, now running the Grand Jury, wrote to Smit. He told him that his request to give evidence to the Grand Jury 'is denied'. At the same time, Kane issued an injunction against Smit. It demanded the surrender of all his evidence and sought court permission to 'permanently erase' it."

[Again from the Elite transcript quoted above in previous post.]

We the general public know only that which we are allowed to know through the media, perhaps there is so little evidence in support of an intruder because such information was ignored.

As has been pointed out here many times, the garrote did not function as a garrote. Pulling the handle would have had no effect at all, for a knot had been tied on her neck before, and a knot would have prevented effective garroting. Therefore the multiple wraps around the paintbrush handle were completely useless. (see Delmar England's exhaustive analysis of the ligatures and garrote on the ACandyRose site).

In addition, if JB had actually tried to remove the garrote from her neck, her own skin debris would have been found under her fingernails. But none of her skin was found there.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

In my mind, there are only three ways that "garotte" could have functioned as Smit wants us to believe it had -

1. By twisting the handle to take up slack in the rope and pinch the cord tighter around the neck. The seventeen inches of length between the knot and the handle make this near impossible. You'd want only a few inches maximum for this to be effective as a stragulation device, and you'd use a noose knot that would keep slipping down tighter as you twisted.

2. By grabbing the handle and yanking, pulling the cord tighter against the throat. Again, the amount of length makes this choice sound implausible, and since it was a fixed knot and not a slider, all yanking would have done is lifted JB up off the ground, not pulled the knot tighter.

3. By inserting the paintbrush between the skin and the cord, and twisting the handle to crank the cord ever tighter around the neck. We know this didn't happen because the evidence doesn't support it.

The person who tied the cord around JonBenet's neck had no idea how to create a truly functional garotte. There was nothing elaborate or complex about that knot, it was not a sliding noose knot, and any one of us on this board could have done it ourselves. There is very little damage to the interior of JB's neck, indicating she was not struggling against her attacker. She did not claw at her neck, and if she had, as rashomon said, there would be definite evidence in the form of her own skin under her nails.

 

[Solace]

So John Ramsey reveals for the first time that he had snuck away from the group upstairs, gone to the basement alone, found the basement window open about 1/8 of an inch, closed it, latched it, and then went back upstairs and told no one about it.

Thanks for that link regarding the discussion on the basement. Now really folks why in the world if you found an OPEN window in your home after searching for your daughter, would you CLOSE it but say nothing to the police officer upstairs when supposedly at that time your daughter was STILL missing? You would have to be a complete idiot. You know I had forgotten all this and it still baffles the HELL out of me why the Ramsey’s weren’t immediately arrested and charged for this crime.

Okay, bear with me here. Why do you feel that closing the window implicates John. The window being opened is what the pro-Ramsey people are saying implicates an intruder. So in closing the window, isn't he taking his alibi away?

Also, I know I have read many times that Fleet moved the suitcase and I also read that he put the shards of glass on top of it. Can anyone here post his telling anyone, as in a transcript, that he did so.

Thanks very much. Solace

 

[PagingDrDetect]

It has not been established as fact that the marks on JB are not from a stun gun.

Yes, it has. There was no stun gun. Sorry, no stun gun. Nope, not a stun gun.

Dr. Meyer and Dr. Wecht were the only qualified people to remark on what the marks found on JBR were as they were the only experts to see them in person. They were abrasions, not burns, and stated so in the autopsy report. Comments from Dr. Wecht...

Dr. Cyril Wecht: "The stun gun theory has been around for some time. I know for a fact that this was submitted to various experts in stun guns and manufacturers, criminalists, forensic pathologists, law enforcement people, they all rejected it."

"I also know for a fact that Mr. Smit, pursuant to his own request, presented this to one of the top-flight forensic scientists, who along with another top-flight forensic scientist of a different subspecialty, rejected it."

Dr. Meyer...

7/18/03 - On the MSNBC Dan Abrams Show last night, Michael Kane (the special prosecutor brought in to handle the Ramsey case) commented for the first time in public about the stun gun myth:

KANE: The thing about the stun gun that everybody keeps coming back to. There was one person who was qualified who actually looked at that little girl’s body on the autopsy table and that was Dr. Meyer, who’s a forensic pathologist. He looked at those very marks and said that they were abrasions. It is a quantum leap-you can take a stun gun and put it up against somebody’s body...and it’s going to leave a burn. It dosen't leave an abrasion. So all these other opinions that have come out that said that this was a stun gun, there is absolutely no way they would ever get into evidence because there is no evidence that these were burns.

ABRAMS: But, ... there were other experts like Mr. Doberson and others and Lou Smit who have said they absolutely believe that there was a stun gun used.

KANE: But they’re basing that based on photographs of marks on her body. When the uncontradicted evidence of Dr. Meyer is that these were not burns.

The Boulder ME states very clearly,
MIKE DOBERSEN - "My experiments, and the observations that we made and all the work that's been done, I feel that I can testify to a reasonably degree of medical certainty that these are stun gun injuries."

Doberson was NOT the Boulder ME. He was a coroner approached by Smit to remark on the marks found on the body by examining autopsy photos... he never saw the body. Here's what Doberson said about those marks OUTSIDE of Tracey's crockumentary...

MICHAEL DOBSON: "They came over and showed me some pictures from the (Ramsey) autopsy and asked for my opinion, whether they could be stun gun injuries," Dobersen recalled. "I told them that they could be; that was a possibility. But there were a lot of things they could do to narrow down the possibilities of what it could be."

Dobersen told Boulder investigators to do what The New Yorker reports they eventually did - measure the distance between the wounds and compare that to stun guns.

"Besides", he added, "the only definitive way to tell if electrocution was involved in JonBenet's death is to re-examine her body and look for very characteristic changes in skin tissue."

"You really can't tell from a photo," Dobersen said.
(The Boulder Daily Camera - January 13, 1998)

Whoopsie! Looks like Doberson will say whatever is wanted when he's paid to in a 2002 crockumentary even when years before he had already spoken publically to the contrary (1998). Naughty boy!

That is so bizarre that you quote that Tracey crockumentary as an example of fact when we already know it was a batch of lies. Tracey fingered an innocent man in that crock of being a "prime suspect" when he was not and claimed he had gone "underground" when Tricia found him in a few minutes in a simple Google search.

Tracey and Smit... proven liars and manufacturers of "evidence" they know doesn't exist (and have shamelessly made a fortune off JBR's deadness).


The Stun Gun Myth: http://gemart.8m.com/ramsey/stungun.html

 

[Solace]

So John Ramsey reveals for the first time that he had snuck away from the group upstairs, gone to the basement alone, found the basement window open about 1/8 of an inch, closed it, latched it, and then went back upstairs and told no one about it.

Thanks for that link regarding the discussion on the basement. Now really folks why in the world if you found an OPEN window in your home after searching for your daughter, would you CLOSE it but say nothing to the police officer upstairs when supposedly at that time your daughter was STILL missing? You would have to be a complete idiot. You know I had forgotten all this and it still baffles the HELL out of me why the Ramsey’s weren’t immediately arrested and charged for this crime.

Why do you feel his closing of the window implicates him. Please understand I feel Patsy did this thing and John abetted, but I do not see how his closing the window implicates him?

 

[PagingDrDetect]

I thought the window with the grate was the room adjacent to the one where her body was found.

Here's a great floor plan of the whole house...

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer2/primer10_blue.html

 

[julianne]

Yes, buy by him telling us that the door was blocked, he effectively cut out any possiblity that an intruder came through that window. Although in a later interview, (Atlanta 2000??) JR is so desperate that he actually states that he believes someone could have pulled the chair and boxes close to the door, from the other side of the door, AFTER having closed it.

As our newcomer, Plenum, has pointed out, the R's were initially casting suspicion towards someone with a key. They only resorted to the window/intruder theory when the LE didn't run off after the housekeeper and all the rest of Boulder who had a key.

Seems to me the R's never thought they'd be suspected so they weren't so worried about a POE or framing anyone in particular. I think they misjudged this part just a little.

I guess the difficulty in putting stuff in front of the door all depends on how the door opened. It's only difficult if the door opened AWAY from the person standing on the other side of it. It it opened TOWARD the person, it would not be difficult at all to place things in front of it.

I don't know if there is a standard for interior doors as far as the direction in which they open, but I have a large home that was built a few years ago, and in doing a quick case study of how my doors open, there really seems to be no rhyme or reason to it. I have many interior doors that open away from the person, and I also have many interior doors that open towards the person.

I would like to see a photo of this door.