Intruder theories only - RDI theories not allowed! *READ FIRST POST* #2

[andreww]

First time that I agree with OTG that AR the best fit for the facts of death. I stick to the coroner. I respect others opinions, just can not accept if it contradicts the facts.

For me personally there is three pillars, nobody could shake or deny: ransom, AR and forensic evidences.

The rest is open book. Open for interpretation and opinions. Which will lead away from the truth. All this interrogation tricks, implications without providing the actual prove , they denied to show ANY prove of their "findings". Never ever anybody saw all those " matching" fiber`s lab reports. At least they would show one, dark fibers, or red fibers. Nobody saw. Nobody will ever see, because there is none. It was attempts to corner Ramsey. Failed. And when failed, even then, they had NOTHING in their sleeves to present at least ONE fact and turn the case around, and save their careers. They could not. Ah-Ah...

That's a pretty bold statement to make. But if the fibers didn't exist and were only a tool to try and panic the Ramseys, why would they fabricate such weak evidence? We are talking about a couple of fibers that are "consistent" with what John and Patsy were wearing that night. If LE were going to make stuff up, surely they would have come up with something more damning than a couple of fibers!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tovarisch]

That's a pretty bold statement to make. But if the fibers didn't exist and were only a tool to try and panic the Ramseys, why would they fabricate such weak evidence? We are talking about a couple of fibers that are "consistent" with what John and Patsy were wearing that night. If LE were going to make stuff up, surely they would have come up with something more damning than a couple of fibers!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Correct me if I`m wrong: Courts do not want the government covering up any evidence that`ll help prove the defendant didn`t commit the crime.
Thus, defendants have the right to review the evidence and receive the copies of the police reports. When suspect is not defendant, but suspect under the investigation, his legal representatives have right to request and review copies (might be redacted, but nevertheless) of the police reports.
Correct me if I`m wrong that Linn Wood requested to see fibers matching reports. Correct me if not : he never received it.

 

[Global Justice Ops]

Does anyone know where more uncropped and uncensored autopsy photographs can be found? I'm looking every where and can't find anything.

Thanks

GJO

 

[andreww]

Correct me if I`m wrong: Courts do not want the government covering up any evidence that`ll help prove the defendant didn`t commit the crime.
Thus, defendants have the right to review the evidence and receive the copies of the police reports. When suspect is not defendant, but suspect under the investigation, his legal representatives have right to request and review copies (might be redacted, but nevertheless) of the police reports.
Correct me if I`m wrong that Linn Wood requested to see fibers matching reports. Correct me if not : he never received it.

As JR was never charged with anything, Linn Wood had absolutely no right to see or request to see anything. That is a defendant's right, not a suspect's.

 

[tovarisch]

As JR was never charged with anything, Linn Wood had absolutely no right to see or request to see anything. That is a defendant's right, not a suspect's.

I give up on this argument, retrieve my statement that Lin Wood requested the evidence. He probably not, my mistake. What I confused , it was the interrogation interview, just today refreshed my memory and re-read it again, Lin Wood pressed Levin and Kane on the exact definition of their fiber`s match findings. The investigators were so elusive in their answers, it`s exiting to read how they tip- toped around without answering the question. Dostoevsky himself could not create better dialog between suspect and investigator. Seriously.

 

[tovarisch]

But Andreww,

if they had Mr. Ramsey black fibers in the crotch area, and Mrs. Ramsey red fibers twisted in the cord, common, do you really believe that Ramsey would have not been charged? It`s a rhethorical question, no answer `s needed. Answer is obvious.

 

[Mama2JML]

An excerpt from CNN's 11.12.02 LKL interview with Lin Wood:

"KING: We're back with Lin Wood. Now, police say that they had several key pieces of evidence against the Ramseys. We should point out no charges have ever been brought in this case against anyone, right?

WOOD: Against anyone.

KING: Patsy's clothing fibers -- the biggest one they claim is the fibers from her jacket. They say from what she was wearing were found in the paint tray where the garot used to strangle Jon Benet was found. Fibers were also found on Jon Benet's body, and the duct tape Jon Benet's mouth. And what we are going to show now is the tape of her responding to that charge, right?

Here is Jon Benet's mother, Patsy, responding to that charge about the evidence of the fibers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We have found, and I want you to help us, maybe you can offer an explanation. We have found fibers in the paint tray that appear to come off of the coat in the photograph we showed you.

P. RAMSEY: In the paint tray?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

P. RAMSEY: What's a paint...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: ... ask his question. What's your question?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'll rephrase the question, maybe this will satisfy -- Mrs. Ramsey, I have no evidence from any scientist to suggest that those fibers are from any source other than your red jacket.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Come on. What other sources did they test? How many other red jackets and red and black jackets did they test? That's an unfair question on the face of it, Bruce. Did they test anything other than that red and black jacket? I mean, they can't have information that it could come from another source if they didn't test another source for gosh sakes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: And how, Lin were they -- would you go out and test every red jacket ever made?

WOOD: No, no -- but let me make a couple of points. Number one, police interrogations do not have to be fair, and they don't have to be truthful. So when they ask a question and say they've got evidence that says that fibers from her jacket appear to be consistent with fibers found in the paint tray, that may or may not be true.

I know they asked John Ramsey about fibers during his interrogation, and I know for a fact that the information was not true in terms of the location of those fibers.

Patsy was wearing a red and black and gray jacket, as I recall, and there were red fibers alleged to have been found on the duct tape, and on Jon Benet's body and in the paint tray.

That's what they say.

There were no black fibers. There were no gray fibers. We know that there are brown fibers that have never been sourced. We know that there are blue fibers that have never been sourced.

So the fiber evidence is, I think, extremely weak and besides, she lived in the home. She put Jon Benet to bed that night. There's any one of many innocent explanations for why the fibers might be consistent with something Patsy was wearing.

KING: Now concerning John's clothing fibers. They say there's evidence of fibers from John's clothing on Jon Benet. Here is the father's response.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Ramsey, it is our belief, based on forensic testing that there are hairs that are associated -- that the source is the collared black shirt that you sent to us that are found in your daughter's underpants, and I want to refute...

J. RAMSEY: Bull (EXPLETIVE DELETED). I don't believe that. I don't buy it. If you're trying to disgrace my relationship with my daughter...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Ramsey, I'm not trying to...

J. RAMSEY: Well, I don't believe it. That's ridiculous.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think you are too, Bruce. Let's move on. Why don't you move on.

J. RAMSEY: That's disgusting.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, I am not.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, you are.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let's move to something else, maybe.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let's move to another topic.

J. RAMSEY: The question is, how did fibers of your shirt get in your daughter's underwear? I say that is not possible. I don't believe it. That's ridiculous.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: So you're saying police invent things to try to get respondents to respond?

WOOD: That was invented. We know that there were black fibers found, they claim, but there were no black fibers found in the areas of Jon Benet's underwear, as claimed in that question."​

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0211/12/lkl.00.html

 

[andreww]

But Andreww,

if they had Mr. Ramsey black fibers in the crotch area, and Mrs. Ramsey red fibers twisted in the cord, common, do you really believe that Ramsey would have not been charged? It`s a rhethorical question, no answer `s needed. Answer is obvious.

Fibers really prove anything. According to JR, he carried JBR from the car and put fear to bed. Theoretically those fibres would have been all over JBRs clothing, especially her sweater which apparantly she wore to bed. It would be very easy to discount those fibers. They are a clue but they do very little to prove who killed her.

 

[tovarisch]

Fibers really prove anything. According to JR, he carried JBR from the car and put fear to bed. Theoretically those fibres would have been all over JBRs clothing, especially her sweater which apparantly she wore to bed. It would be very easy to discount those fibers. They are a clue but they do very little to prove who killed her.

That`s why we can not rely on anything other than official statements, signed and stamped, and we are spending years and decades arguing around speculations.
Going back to the official statements, I want to bring up evidence for everybody`s consideration that intruder was a smoker, and obviously had a lighter to fry the cord end from the roll he had). And he used toilet in the basement and had not flushed it, and the cigarettes butts were collected together with the urine . I have read about it as a fact. I`m still researching, where I read about it many years ago. But the inventory list of Search Warrant proves the following had been collected from the crime scene. I want us to consider thoughtfully why police would collect un-flushed urine from the house, if they need samples from Ramsey they could ask for it anytime. I cannot copy, so I type below :

Inventory List from Search Warrant

December 26 page13:
cigarette butts, leaves, bag (58BAH)

December 27, page 6:
towel 51 (BAB)
tissue 52 (BAB)
Liquid from toilet 53 (BAB)
Liquid from toilet 54 (BAB)

December 27, page 7:
toilet tissue (10PP)
toilet seat lid (13PP}

 

[elannia]

That`s why we can not rely on anything other than official statements, signed and stamped, and we are spending years and decades arguing around speculations.
Going back to the official statements, I want to bring up evidence for everybody`s consideration that intruder was a smoker, and obviously had a lighter to fry the cord end from the roll he had). And he used toilet in the basement and had not flushed it, and the cigarettes butts were collected together with the urine . I have read about it as a fact. I`m still researching, where I read about it many years ago. But the inventory list of Search Warrant proves the following had been collected from the crime scene. I want us to consider thoughtfully why police would collect un-flushed urine from the house, if they need samples from Ramsey they could ask for it anytime. I cannot copy, so I type below :

Inventory List from Search Warrant

December 26 page13:
cigarette butts, leaves, bag (58BAH)

December 27, page 6:
towel 51 (BAB)
tissue 52 (BAB)
Liquid from toilet 53 (BAB)
Liquid from toilet 54 (BAB)

December 27, page 7:
toilet tissue (10PP)
toilet seat lid (13PP}

Aha!!! Thanks. So i wonder, who was the smoker? I think I read somewhere that Patsy was occasionally... But I wonder how long they had been in the toilet for? If an intruder killed JB I really dont think he would be smoking a cigarette because of the smell, and fear of waking everyone(but this wasnt your usual intruder lol) But if it was a family member, people who smoke will light one up if nervous, scared, etc.

 

[tovarisch]

Aha!!! Thanks. So i wonder, who was the smoker? I think I read somewhere that Patsy was occasionally... But I wonder how long they had been in the toilet for? If an intruder killed JB I really dont think he would be smoking a cigarette because of the smell, and fear of waking everyone(but this wasnt your usual intruder lol) But if it was a family member, people who smoke will light one up if nervous, scared, etc.

Elannia, consider this, urine from the toilet had been collected. Urine samples from Ramsey had been collected. If the lab analisys would show up that ratio of sugar, protein what else ( I`m far from medicine) had resembled at least 50% of Ramsey`s we would hear scream about "possible match" or " not excluded" long time ago. We have heard nothing. Cigarette butts -all the same, if they were brand of Patsy`s preferable cigarettes (witnesses, friends) and / or found in the house in Patsy`s stock, trust me, or not trust me, but think about-- we would hear about it long time ago. We have heard nothing.
Intruder (s) knew the family`s schedule pretty well, he entered the house while family had been out. I believe that mystery is still solvable. Intruder left a lot of clues. One of it--knowledge of the family matters, schedules and habits. Intruder(s) could be a hired killer, somebody behind the scene could have been the mastermind.

 

[Mama2JML]

What makes you think the butts were in the toilet? Cigarette butts, per Whitson, were collected from the ground, outside.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elannia]

What makes you think the butts were in the toilet? Cigarette butts, per Whitson, were collected from the ground, outside.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oops... my bad.. I thought they were found in the toilet I guess. Dont know what is wrong this brain of mine today

 

[elannia]

Another thing, I didnt even know which thread I had posted on... lol. Im a mess of all sorts today. Anyways i wont go into detail but imo there was no intruder...

 

[Mama2JML]

Oops... my bad.. I thought they were found in the toilet I guess. Dont know what is wrong this brain of mine today

No, it's my bad. Sorry!

I should have quoted tovarisch. I'm curious as to why she believes cigarette butts were found in the toilet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tovarisch]

No, it's my bad. Sorry!

I should have quoted tovarisch. I'm curious as to why she believes cigarette butts were found in the toilet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I believe that at least one cigarette butt , ore more was collected from the toilet in the basement with un-flushed urine. Why I believe, because I`ve read it, and it imprinted in my brain, how bold and daring, and thus dangerous the intruder was, and I now trying to restore my memory and find the original source. It was not on internet website or discussion forum. Because we have moved in the tiny apartment, I left most of my books in the old house. I believe it was in the book. I believe I know what book, but until I go visit back there in December and put my hands on it, I can not quote.

 

[Mama2JML]

I believe that at least one cigarette butt , ore more was collected from the toilet in the basement with un-flushed urine. Why I believe, because I`ve read it, and it imprinted in my brain, how bold and daring, and thus dangerous the intruder was, and I now trying to restore my memory and find the original source. It was not on internet website or discussion forum. Because we have moved in the tiny apartment, I left most of my books in the old house. I believe it was in the book. I believe I know what book, but until I go visit back there in December and put my hands on it, I can not quote.

I understand.

Which book? I might have it, and I could look...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elannia]

No, it's my bad. Sorry!

I should have quoted tovarisch. I'm curious as to why she believes cigarette butts were found in the toilet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No prob

 

[tovarisch]

I understand.

Which book? I might have it, and I could look...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ramsey`s book. Please look at the last chapter , their theory about the killer. I know that for RDI it`s not a reliable source, but we are not them, and for me this particular information butts- urine is very important, it`s collaborates the list of inventory and what had been done with the toilet in the basement, disassembled to the pieces by the police, it`s a very significant evidence all together. Please, let us know if you find the quote. Thank you.

 

[andreww]

Elannia, consider this, urine from the toilet had been collected. Urine samples from Ramsey had been collected. If the lab analisys would show up that ratio of sugar, protein what else ( I`m far from medicine) had resembled at least 50% of Ramsey`s we would hear scream about "possible match" or " not excluded" long time ago. We have heard nothing. Cigarette butts -all the same, if they were brand of Patsy`s preferable cigarettes (witnesses, friends) and / or found in the house in Patsy`s stock, trust me, or not trust me, but think about-- we would hear about it long time ago. We have heard nothing.
Intruder (s) knew the family`s schedule pretty well, he entered the house while family had been out. I believe that mystery is still solvable. Intruder left a lot of clues. One of it--knowledge of the family matters, schedules and habits. Intruder(s) could be a hired killer, somebody behind the scene could have been the mastermind.

You say the intruder knew the family habits. But this was Christmas day, and there are no habits. Every Christmas is different. Kids stay up later. It's far from habitual.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk