arielilane
Justice for Liz Barraza
JR and PR did it. I agree...cover up...sad what money can buy you...In light of the new DNA evidence, who do you believe killed Jonbenet?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
JR and PR did it. I agree...cover up...sad what money can buy you...In light of the new DNA evidence, who do you believe killed Jonbenet?
I have not changed my opinion. I believe Patsey Ramsey accidentally killed her daughter and in a panic, staged the sexual assault and attempted kidnapping.
If the DNA is ever matched to a sex offender or someone who was in Boulder at the time of JonBenet's death and who does not have an alibi and who could not have come in casual contact with her, then I will revise my viewpoint.
Unknown miniscule skin cells found on a 6 year old's clothing doens't to me change the rest of the evidence that the 'intrusion' was staged.
My theory has always been since day 1 that Patsy walked in on John molesting JonBeney and went spastic and killed her. Since both parents were guilty of a crime, neither could tell on the other so they chose to cover it up. This hocus pocus testing that was broadcast yesterday was just that, hocus pocus.
It is the biggest cover up I've ever heard of!
xxxxxxxxoooo
mama
:blowkiss::blowkiss:
My theory hasn't changed at all. Patsy did it in a fit of rage...and John helped to cover it up. Patsy wrote the RN. The so called DNA that was discovered on her panties years ago..was defragmented. It is very obvious to me...that the defragmented DNA on the panties, made its way to her long johns via transfer. It's not rocket science here....NOW...if Mary Lacy puts forth some evidence that the cord, the RN, the pen, etc...has some sort of touch DNA that belongs to an "Unknown Male"..I will start to believe the intruder theory. But ONLY THEN....and THAT is NOT going to happen. I would like to know how defragmented DNA suddenly became enough evidence to clear somebody anyway? This....imo...does NOT clear the Ramseys in any shape or form. Too much evidence suggests otherwise!
This is a set up!! The long johns never left Boulder only the result of the skin cells and at that it was not a complete match. No this does not convince me that the Ramseys are innocent
What I would like to know is....was the spoon (in the pineapple bowl), the garotte (broken paintbrush and cord), JB's bedsheets, JB's blanket that she was wrapped in, the Barbie nightgown that was found near her body, the RN, the Sharpie pen used to write the RN tested too? Probably not...if so...were are the findings??? If an "intruder" touched JB's panties and long johns ...to pull them down and then up again...and left TOUCH DNA...then all of these other things would certainly have touch DNA on them TOO. Even more so....on the paper used to write the RN, the sharpie, and the garotte...since he would have most likely handled these things longer.
ITA! the whole ransom note thing to me screams "STAGED"!. I mean, really, for what reason would an intruder write this note? Why take the time? What would be the thinking behind it? It made no sense. Obviously, she wasn't kidnapped, there was no ransom demanded, so what would be the reason, other than a coverup?What I would like to know is....was the spoon (in the pineapple bowl), the garotte (broken paintbrush and cord), JB's bedsheets, JB's blanket that she was wrapped in, the Barbie nightgown that was found near her body, the RN, the Sharpie pen used to write the RN tested too? Probably not...if so...were are the findings??? If an "intruder" touched JB's panties and long johns ...to pull them down and then up again...and left TOUCH DNA...then all of these other things would certainly have touch DNA on them TOO. Even more so....on the paper used to write the RN, the sharpie, and the garotte...since he would have most likely handled these things longer.
My opinion has not changed. I have always felt it was an intruder.
From the latest release on the results of the new testing it seems so far that it is certainly leaning that way.
I will maintain my same opinion until there is evidence to show otherwise.
imoo
ITA! the whole ransom note thing to me screams "STAGED"!. I mean, really, for what reason would an intruder write this note? Why take the time? What would be the thinking behind it? It made no sense. Obviously, she wasn't kidnapped, there was no ransom demanded, so what would be the reason, other than a coverup?
This story reminds me so much of "the dingo did it" case in Australia, many years ago. The parents in that case were also the target of suspicion, and public opinion was overwhelmingly against them. Many years later it was forensically proven that a dingo did take the baby, just as the mother had been saying all along....but the damage had already been done by then. Lindy Chamberlain spent years in jail, suffered the hatred of a whole nation, was separated from her other children, eventually her marriage collapsed....and this ofcourse on top of the pain of losing her baby. Once cleared, there were no audible apologies....and to this day many continue to belief that she was guilty, despite the evidence pointing to the contrary. I think much of the same applies in this case.
Sometimes appearances can be deceiving. Lindy Chamberlain looked guilty. She did not react the way that most people thought she should have reacted. She paid a high price for people's judgements....but that did not make her guilty.
I beg you all to keep an open mind, and an open heart. Who are we to judge others. Let God do that. At the end of the day, we really do not know what happened. We base our opinions on our perceptions and beliefs....is that enough??
Granted the dingo took the baby, but Lindy was still guilty of neglect in leaving her baby unattended so that the dingo could get it.This story reminds me so much of "the dingo did it" case in Australia, many years ago. The parents in that case were also the target of suspicion, and public opinion was overwhelmingly against them. Many years later it was forensically proven that a dingo did take the baby, just as the mother had been saying all along....but the damage had already been done by then. Lindy Chamberlain spent years in jail, suffered the hatred of a whole nation, was separated from her other children, eventually her marriage collapsed....and this ofcourse on top of the pain of losing her baby. Once cleared, there were no audible apologies....and to this day many continue to belief that she was guilty, despite the evidence pointing to the contrary. I think much of the same applies in this case.
Sometimes appearances can be deceiving. Lindy Chamberlain looked guilty. She did not react the way that most people thought she should have reacted. She paid a high price for people's judgements....but that did not make her guilty.
I beg you all to keep an open mind, and an open heart. Who are we to judge others. Let God do that. At the end of the day, we really do not know what happened. We base our opinions on our perceptions and beliefs....is that enough??
Pepper, just to explain my personal position. I do not "want" family members to be guilty. I came into this case as a fence sitter. I explored the IDI possibilities every which way to Sunday... Actually, I sincerely hoped to find a logical way that an intruder could have committed this crime. I posted various intruder theories, but when you combine all of the evidence, the R's just kept casting themselves into the middle of the melting pot.
I can't speak definatively for other posters here, but I sincerely feel that many RDI's came to the same conclusion which I did, in virtually the same way that I did: based on the totality of the evidence.
I think the Ramseys covered for each other. Both John and Patsy were involved in this, I'm not sure about Burke.
Sorry but you have to exclude both John and Burke at this point...What is it you do not understand!!