Grand Jury Indictment Supports my Theory

[BOESP]

I think PR and JR didn't want their son's name associated with murdering his sister because it made them look like bad parents and they would clearly do anything to avoid that, and would rather be seen by family, co-workers and friends as grieving parents (which they also were), other than "how could THEY raise a murderer, I thought there were good people."

Excellent point to consider! Thanks for posting this.

 

[bettybaby00]

Covering for BR is the only thing that has the most compelling behaviors, as revealed by Kolar, and his thesis. The law, although understandable goes too far when the result means the case can't be closed....that part should be changed IMO.

I can't see a couple going to such extremes only to cover for their spouse. Yuk, staying with your molesting, murdering spouse for nearly 10 years.

 

[Anyhoo]

BBM

You pretty much answered your own question.

Although I don't necessarily consider the current DA corrupt, the previous 2 have a great deal to answer to. Especially Mary lacy.

I notice in my comment that you quoted, part of my answer went wonky....what I tried typing--although i think my meaning was clear--is that DNA evidence can't be viewed in a vacuum, and DNA doesn't necessarily clear someone unless it conclusively points to someone else. In this case, touch DNA is what was found at the scene, and at any given time, everyone of us can have hundreds of different touch DNA samples on our body and clothing.

That was sarcasm on my part because I already knew that is what you were saying. Why? Because in the end that is the only thing you can say if you disbelieve the DNA evidence. Foreign DNA was found underneath JBR's fingernails and matching DNA was found in her underwear. Meaningless? I don't think so. I think that the real reason you and others refuse to see the DNA evidence as significant because it turns your theory that the one or both of the parents or Burke is the murderer on its head.

I think the opposite. That DNA is not meaningless but is a smoking gun, along with the Hi-Tec boot print and all of the other evidence that points to someone outside of the immediate family. But don't get me wrong. I do not in any way exonerate JR and PR nor do I believe a mystery intruder snuck in, killed JBR, and then snuck out. The answer lies elsewhere, where they don't want you to look (or even consider as being possible).

 

[LinasK]

Covering for BR is the only thing that has the most compelling behaviors, as revealed by Kolar, and his thesis. The law, although understandable goes too far when the result means the case can't be closed....that part should be changed IMO.

I can't see a couple going to such extremes only to cover for their spouse. Yuk, staying with your molesting, murdering spouse for nearly 10 years.

I can- Patsy was a stand-by-your-man kinda gal.

 

[wengr]

I can- Patsy was a stand-by-your-man kinda gal.

Sure it's POSSIBLE. Look hard enough and you can find an example of anything. (except of course another example of a ransom note about a kidnapping that did not occur).
But what response to the crime is more PLAUSIBLE?

An R protects a molesting murderous spouse?
OR
Rs protect a remaining child and work to hide the ugly truth?

 

[gramcracker]

I can- Patsy was a stand-by-your-man kinda gal.

or, stand by your ATM. Nedra said JR earns it and we spend it

 

[LonelyPoet]

I just purchased a book by Chief Kolar. Thank you for the recommendation. I can't say I'm looking forward to reading it because of the subject matter, but after some Googling and watching a few videos that showcase his knowledge ... I want to hear/read everything this man has to say.

I tend to waffle with my beliefs about the murderer's identity. Sometimes I think it must have been Burke. Other times I think Patsy did it. Other times I think John is guilty. And I can read something somewhere and become convinced that the parents were letting people do rotten things to that little girl for whatever reason. Money? Child *advertiser censored*? I don't know. And when I think about her --- I can't decide which would be worse --- knowing that your family was harming/killing you or a complete stranger was doing it.

Poor little girl. Just breaks my heart.

 

[bettybaby00]

My response to this is that if the DNA is not really indicative of anything, then why would the Boulder DA say that the DNA is the basis for finding that the Ramsey's were innocent of the murder and going so far as to publicly apologize to them? It seems like not everyone agrees with your assessment of the DNA as worthless evidence, including myself. It seems like whenever someone mentions the DNA evidence, the immediate response here is that it is meaningless. Please don't tell me: You think the Boulder DA is compromised and corrupt and does not really believe the DNA is significant.

That was sarcasm on my part because I already knew that is what you were saying. Why? Because in the end that is the only thing you can say if you disbelieve the DNA evidence. Foreign DNA was found underneath JBR's fingernails and matching DNA was found in her underwear. Meaningless? I don't think so. I think that the real reason you and others refuse to see the DNA evidence as significant because it turns your theory that the one or both of the parents or Burke is the murderer on its head.

I think the opposite. That DNA is not meaningless but is a smoking gun, along with the Hi-Tec boot print and all of the other evidence that points to someone outside of the immediate family. But don't get me wrong. I do not in any way exonerate JR and PR nor do I believe a mystery intruder snuck in, killed JBR, and then snuck out. The answer lies elsewhere, where they don't want you to look (or even consider as being possible).

Got it...

But FWIW, check out the transcript from Tricia's show...the GJ was convened and focused on the IDI, and yet they sought to indict the Rs. If not an intruder or a R, not sure who else could be the perpetrator.

her finger nail and underwear findings are not a match. In fact 6 different profiles were found on JRB. Good thing they had such a big basement yea? Who am I to argue against those who believe the Rs went/continue to go to such extremes in order to protect someone outside of the immediate household. And the boot print, guess who was reported to have a pair, but they disappeared, could not be found once the investigation was under way?

....if DNA evidence had been presented at the time of the GJ, what would it show, how is it a smoking gun?

The compelling thing about Kolar is he pretty much debunks all indicators of a non-Immediate family member. Not b/c he wants them to be involved, but b/c that's where it leads. P&Js actions viewed in their totality are damning, no other way to look at it. By throwing everyone they knew under the bus, the Rs ironically were the only ones left standing.

All :moo: of course...I have no illusions that I'm going to change minds.

 

[Nom de plume]

That was sarcasm on my part because I already knew that is what you were saying. Why? Because in the end that is the only thing you can say if you disbelieve the DNA evidence. Foreign DNA was found underneath JBR's fingernails and matching DNA was found in her underwear. Meaningless? I don't think so. I think that the real reason you and others refuse to see the DNA evidence as significant because it turns your theory that the one or both of the parents or Burke is the murderer on its head.

I think the opposite. That DNA is not meaningless but is a smoking gun, along with the Hi-Tec boot print and all of the other evidence that points to someone outside of the immediate family. But don't get me wrong. I do not in any way exonerate JR and PR nor do I believe a mystery intruder snuck in, killed JBR, and then snuck out. The answer lies elsewhere, where they don't want you to look (or even consider as being possible).

Anyhoo, with all due respect, you've got some of your facts confused. First of all, JB's nails were all clipped with the same dirty pair of clippers. Each nail is supposed to have a new, clean set used. The coroner used the same pair he'd used on other people without cleaning them! Therefore that DNA could have been off of another dead body. BTW, it did NOT match any other DNA found on her.

The rest of the DNA, IIRC and am not mistaken, is all touch DNA or skin cells that are transferred by touching someone, shaking hands, etc. Right now you probably have a dozen different touch DNA profiles on you somewhere. The ONLY DNA that wasn't touch was a tiny degraded speck, mixed with JB's blood found in the underwear. One tiny speck. It matched no other DNA of any kind found anywhere else. That one tiny speck is thought to have come from a factory worker when the Bloomies were manufactured, from a cough or a sneeze.

BR reportedly owned a pair of Hi-Techs that disappeared. LE wear Hi-Tech too. Again, like the touch DNA, this partial print can't be relied upon for evidence of anyone else being there, whether invited or not.

I'm not saying there wasn't someone besides the Rs present that night, but you can't rely on unreliable things to prove it.

 

[bettybaby00]

does anyone think the marks in other photos look the same? one I have in mind is where JB is wearing a red dress and the marks are on her lower leg?

Never saw it. I have avoided autopsy photos as much as I could. Cried at the one and only in Kolar's book.

 

[freshwater]

Unknown outsider: "Hey, aren't you John and Patsy Ramsey? I've read about your company in the local newspaper, John. My name is Joe Blow."

Ramseys: "It's nice to meet you, Joe. Can we help you with something?"

Unknown outsider: "This is a shot in the dark here, but I know you have a young daughter who takes part in beauty pageants. I was wondering....would you let us abuse her in your basement as part of my group's satanic sexual rituals? Feel free to say no if I'm being too forward with my request."

Ramseys: "No need to be shy. Of course you can conduct your rituals in my basement with our daughter. Just be careful, OK? We wouldn't want one of these rituals to go wrong."