If you support the Ramseys or are on the fence, please read this...

[Afton]

I am glad you mentioned Westerfield not leaving any DNA, hair or fibers in the house. Seems the sticking point is that some thinks there should be another crime committed with a child left in the house and a ransom note...However I don't buy that...This is a unique crime just as many more are unique --some parts of other crimes are similar and some parts of the crimes are not repeated elsewhere. It would be interesting for crime scene investigators to do a data base on crime scene clues that are unique to one crime only.

 

[Texana]

Well, I'm on the fence, but I haven't decided the Ramseys are innocent. That's what "on the fence" means.

My biggest problem with considering the evidence against the Ramseys is the contaminated crime scene.

As I see it, there are three possible scenarios--if you were doing a logic path chart it would go like this: A) Ramseys are guilty, one killed JB, and both staged the scene B) One of the Ramseys is guilty, and staged the scene, the other (s) family members don't know this C) An intruder, either known to the family or unknown, killed JB. You can change the family members in each of A and B, but the general paths remain the same.

All chart paths seem to be more or less equal at this point in terms of evidence.

 

[Maxi]

If I recall correctly, Westerfield didn't spend much time in the house. Didn't the evidence indicate that he had killed Danielle in his mobile home?

OTOH, whoever killed JBR seems to have spent a good deal of time in the Ramsey home that night. It seems to be pretty certain that JBR was molested and killed in her home, and it seems most likely that the killer also took the time to write the ransom note there.

The longer a perp is in the home, the more chance there is that he will leave physical evidence.

 

[Afton]

Yet there is still unidentified fiber(s), DNA and a shoeprint -- or has the fibers and shoeprint been definitely identified?

 

[Ivy]

Fibers consistent with fibers from the black wool shirt made in Israel that John wore to the Whites' were found in JonBenet's crotch area, and fibers consistent with Patsy's jacket fibers were found ENTWINED in the garotte knot. The shoe print found near JonBenet's body has been identified as Burke Ramsey's.

Edited to add: The palm print on the basement door has been identified as belonging to John's daughter Melinda, and I believe I read that the axillary hair found in association with JonBenet's body belonged to Melinda as well.

 

[Britt]

...whoever killed JBR seems to have spent a good deal of time in the Ramsey home that night. ...The longer a perp is in the home, the more chance there is that he will leave physical evidence.

Right, Maxi. Plus... this was a staged crime. Even if one believes there was an intruder, the crime scene was staged, with a phony ransom note for a non-kidnapping.

Since it was a staged crime, case studiers should be studying other staged crimes. Staged crimes are the only relevant comps here. VanDam, Klaas etc do not qualify and are not comparable.

 

[Geno]

a most comfortable place to be...considering most of us regular folks aren't privy at this writing to a legit presentation of the facts as known in this case.

I hope that fence straddlers are still welcome on at least one forum that remains from our original cadre of "JBR" boards.

very nice premise for a thread, MissMisty...hopefully gets the new and improved Forum off to a good start for this new year.

 

[tipper]

Fibers consistent with fibers from the black wool shirt made in Israel that John wore to the Whites' were found in JonBenet's crotch area, and fibers consistent with Patsy's jacket fibers were found ENTWINED in the garotte knot. The shoe print found near JonBenet's body has been identified as Burke Ramsey's.

Edited to add: The palm print on the basement door has been identified as belonging to John's daughter Melinda, and I believe I read that the axillary hair found in association with JonBenet's body belonged to Melinda as well.

I think I'll wait until this information has been verified by an official source. Anonymous sources and possible police interrogation tactics aren't sufficient.

 

[sissi]

I think I'll wait until this information has been verified by an official source. Anonymous sources and possible police interrogation tactics aren't sufficient.

sounds reasonable to me...I'll pass until verified...as well!

 

[Maikai]

is the only thing I see the Ramseys guilty of. There was a broken window that was never fixed, which appears to be at least the entry point to the home, with an unsecured window grate, and there was not a user-friendly good security system installed at the time the home was remodelled. There should have been more control as to who keys were given to. There was a lot of criminal activity going on in the University Hill area. Considering the wealth of the Ramseys and their high visibility, including the pageants and related activities, their house should have been made more secure against intruders. That is the only area in which I'm critical of the Ramseys, and something I'm sure has haunted them, since the murder.

 

[Barbara]

is the only thing I see the Ramseys guilty of. There was a broken window that was never fixed, which appears to be at least the entry point to the home, with an unsecured window grate, and there was not a user-friendly good security system installed at the time the home was remodelled. There should have been more control as to who keys were given to. There was a lot of criminal activity going on in the University Hill area. Considering the wealth of the Ramseys and their high visibility, including the pageants and related activities, their house should have been made more secure against intruders. That is the only area in which I'm critical of the Ramseys, and something I'm sure has haunted them, since the murder.

I have to disagree. If they were haunted by their error, then what is the story with them continuing to leave their NEW home unsecured with an UNLOCKED gun cabinet?

As far as the DNA goes, I'll go with Dr. Lee's opinion rather than those on the forums. Maybe in 2525 we'll have an answer? The DNA will match nobody as it is likely unrelated to the murder, but it is quite the convenience for the RST and the Ramseys to take themselves out from under that umbrella and continue the lawsuits.

It is painfully obvious that Mary Keenan will do everything BUT clear them as suspects. Just enough to prevent a lawsuit. Similar to Hunter "not clearing" Burke, but stating he was never a suspect. Nobody is a suspect according to LE

But whatever works for you

 

[Afton]

I heard Dr. Lee say it wasn't a DNA case--years back when I was posting--because there wasn't enough markers to identify anyone, only to rule out. The tests are more sophisticated now, so now is the time to ask him if he still thinks that. The reason for the FBI database is to identify the perp. The FBI would not take samples unless they meet their criteria to identify...

 

[Shylock]

I heard Dr. Lee say it wasn't a DNA case--years back when I was posting--because there wasn't enough markers to identify anyone, only to rule out. The tests are more sophisticated now, so now is the time to ask him if he still thinks that. The reason for the FBI database is to identify the perp. The FBI would not take samples unless they meet their criteria to identify...

Afton, since you were away for a while, have you read this article?: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/ramsey/article/0,1299,DRMN_1296_1554639,00.html

The fact that the FBI takes in samples for identification has nothing to do with whether or not the DNA is related to the crime. I believe Dr. Lee made the statement that "this is not a DNA case" because there was nothing to indicate to him that the DNA, no matter how many markers it had, was even related to the crime and not just some form of contamination.

 

[Afton]

for making a good valid point because it is true:

the speculation that is was at the point of manufacturer will be argued by the prosecution.

Also true that the defense will argue that it came from the perp.

A big reason why they weren't indicted

1...until the markers match a perp who has no alibi for that night
2...whose handwriting matches the ransom note
3...turns out to be a known molester or killer
4...or a jail cell confession to an inmate

We can only speculate whether the DNA is from the perp or contamination elsewhere. I don't believe the prosecution or the defense can be absolutely sure they will convince a jury of their opinion.

Same with the ransom note, it is not clearly from Patsy--IMO after killing your child, a mother would not have the presence of mind to write a note like that...Also I thought the CBI had her on the lower end of the scale as a match. Some may want to take Darnay's expert as gospel, but IMO he had his own agenda.

It is in our hearts and minds after all these years as to who one thinks killed Jon Benet.. I don't think that will be changed by a post from me or anyone else. Misty's thread showed me, there are far more fence sitters then I thought at Websleuths--will any of us change our mind? I doubt it.

If we know that we are not convincing anyone, then why do we (including me) post?

 

[Barbara]

It is in our hearts and minds after all these years as to who one thinks killed Jon Benet.. I don't think that will be changed by a post from me or anyone else. Misty's thread showed me, there are far more fence sitters then I thought at Websleuths--will any of us change our mind? I doubt it.

If we know that we are not convincing anyone, then why do we (including me) post?

You are so right Afton. It will take more than any poster's post to make anyone change their feelings at this point in time.

I think although most of us really believe that this case will never be solved, there's always that minute chance that something will happen of significance to break the case.

I guess we all just live with that small little tidbit of hope that we'll actually be active on the forums when something real happens. OR...
maybe Lin is right and we really are a disturbed group of individuals :crazy:

 

[Imon128]

Barbara....LOL, who, us? :crazy:

Good one.... :laugh:

 

[Barbara]

Barbara....LOL, who, us? :crazy:

Good one.... :laugh:

Yes, I'm afraid it is US. At least I feel I'm in great company :blowkiss:

 

[Imon128]

This case would drive anybody crazy, LOL, just look at all the dropouts on the investigative team (not that they're all crazy, probably a preemptive move) ....I'm glad you're sticking it out with the rest of us, Barbara.

 

[vicktor]

Then you need to get your butt over to FFJ and view Darnay Hoffman's court evidence of Patsy's handwriting compared to the ransom note. If you do that and you're not convinced that Patsy wrote the note......

I too have seen exemplars of Patsy's handwriting and was struck by how similar some of them looked to the ransom note. But consider that judging by the numbers on the pages, she must have made many samples in which many letters are formed in different ways and also that even given this 4 CDE's involved with the DA's office give her a low score. There could be something more there.

In addition, a sample of another suspect's writing, sometimes referred to as Thomas Aquinas, was posted on another forum a while back. I was struck by how similar many of the letters were to the RN. He made his t's in 3 separate ways that all appeared in the note. The letter patterns found within similar words in his note and the RN were very similar in some cases. A few letters appear consistant throught the RN, such as "u". And this letter was formed in the same fashion in his note also. And also curious was the fact that a review of the available writings of the suspect showed that he mispelled words with double consanants 5 times.

If nothing else, this can demonstrate that there are others who have similar handwriting.

 

[Honeybee]

I don't say that I 'firmly' believe ni their innocence - because I don't know the Ramseys, I wasn't there and who knows what goes on behind closed doors?

However, I do believe that Patsy adored JonBenet with all her heart and I don't think she would stay with John if he was a monster.

I can't understand anyone who wasn't an eye witness being able to say that they 'know' the Ramseys are innocent. They cannot possibly know that for sure. People can feel strongly that they are innocent, but they can't know for sure.

The Ramseys have every incentive to lie about events that night and we must bear that in mind - not dismiss it outright, but bear it in mind. John Ramsey has been known to tell lies, so his word is worth less in my mind because of that.

But I cannot envisage of them killing their daughter.

I agree with you that we cannot know for a fact whether or not the Ramseys are innocent, but I lean toward their innocence. I am curious, though, what you meant when you posted that they have every incentive to lie. If they are innocent, which I think you consider a possibility, they would have no incentive to lie. Guilt, however, would be a powerful incentive. :twocents: