Possible NEW Suspects In JonBenet Ramsey Case?

[Tricia]

It's pretty obvious no real discussion is wanted here. Please delete me from the membership.

Here's the thing. We don't allow ANYWHERE on the forum for people to pull suspects out of their orifices.

To suggest Brian David Mitchell had anything to do with JonBenet makes the whole forum look nutty.

If anyone has anything that logically points to another suspect I am all ears.

If you are going to whine because I ask you to please abide by our Terms of Service then perhaps Websleuths is not for you.

 

[Tricia]

Someone, somewhere, is the killer and, as of this moment, no one is an official suspect. We have to be able to talk about unofficial ones to discuss the case at all. How many people suspect NINE year old Burke? Come one.
Very unlikely and I am fairly sure he isn't an official suspect.

I think BDM is an unusual suggestion. I have to say, it had never occured to me and I have never seen it mentioned anywhere else. After reading this thread, I am intrigued. Not that I necessarily believe it, but it is as valid as other ideas I have seen. Someone killed her and his history is closer than any other known person.
AK,
A lot of things you suggest make some sense to me.
The language of the ransom,

I don't think it is farfetched that someone gave JonBenet food and a toy to keep her calm. BDM had no qualms about leaving Elizabeth's sister in the room as a witness. I think it shows that some kidnappers feel they are above being caught.

As far as the IDI theory, two people, to me, makes just as much sense as one. One to stay upstairs and clean up, pack, lay out the RN whatever. One to take her downstairs. The person downstairs can't wait and kills her.
The second person comes down and she is already dead. They both leave.
Maybe this was their first attempt. I think it is worth looking into any other cases where children were taken from their homes.

I don't think that is anymore unlikely than that her entire family was in on killing her and/or covering it up.

As far as JR searching the basement first, the second time around, it makes sense to me. They had already searched the upper floors earlier, so they start with the places no one had looked yet.

Anyway, I enjoyed reading a thread about a completely new idea. Whether or not BDM is a viable suspect, it shows me that there are suspects that are still completely off the police radar.

I have no problem talking about unofficial suspects as long as they have some logic to them and they are not a private citizen.

I can show you a million suspects who might have done it but there is no evidence to even hint they were in Boulder.

Brian David Mitchell does not write ransom notes. He thinks he is God. Does his DNA match? If it did trust me we would have heard about it.

I constantly have to battle the perception that people who post on forums are strange. We know we have great members on Websleuths but there are still people (especially in law enforcement) who think anyone who posts on a forum like this is weird

When we allow posts like the ones posted here that have NOTHING in them that can logically suggest another suspect we give the people who pigeonhole us as weird more fodder for their opinion

 

[ravenwitch]

I do understand that we can't just randomly accuse people. Things get quoted and repeated until it is hard to remember which part is the verifiable truth.

 

[vlpate]

I do understand that we can't just randomly accuse people. Things get quoted and repeated until it is hard to remember which part is the verifiable truth.

exactly....and it's quite often a calculated move to mislead and bury the truth.
There are many sources for the truth:
The autopsy
Depositions
MANY interviews of Patsy and John Ramsey
Search warrants

Documented information can be found here at WS and:
www.acandyrose.com
www.forumsforjustice.org

If it is a blog, topix, or an "encyclopedia" that quotes "hats", take the information with a grain of salt.

 

[Roy23]

Dear AKWILKS

Please listen to the Websleuths Radio show tomorrow night. 8 PM EST.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/websleuths/2011/08/15/websleuths-radio

The DNA MEANS NOTIHNG.

Also you said the Boulder PD mostly backed up what Lacy said about clearing John and Patsy. I need a link to something that backs up this claim otherwise I am going to remove it.

Also are you suggesting Brian David Mitchell is a suspect? NO WAY IN HELL. Unless you have something substantial to back that up I'll have to remove it also.

AKWILKS, Websleuths is different than other forums. We don't allow people to come in and post theroies that are off the wall with nothing to back them up.

Let's review; I need from you a link to a main stream media interview where the police say they back up what Mary Lacy said about the Ramseys and something somewhere where someone with authority said BDM is a possible suspect in this case. Otherwise your posts will be removed.

Tricia Griffith
Co-Owner Websleuths.com

Wow! How can you say the DNA means nothing? If you read Mark Beckner's statement it totally contradicts this. Exonerating the Ramsey's may have been presumptuous but to say the DNA means nothing is an opinion only.

I enjoy your site. And I appreciate being a member here and I hope that continues. I have even defended your site because of issues concerning this case. I do worry though that discussion is not really tolerated. More leeway seems to be shown for RDI.

 

[BBB167893]

Incorrect, Lin Wood caused the DA to clear the Ramsey family. A token gesture to avoid litigation. The fact remains, there is much more evidence that points to Ramsey's guilt than to an intruder. In fact, there has never been any evidence of an intruder. As for the DNA - Mary Lacy herself finds it meaningless.



Actually, the police told Boulder residents there was no killer on the loose in the days immediately following the murder. The tabloids convict a lot of people with lies and rumors - it's what they do.


Not true - Linda Hoffman Pugh said in an interview that Patsy used to take JBR into the bathroom, after a bedwetting incident, close the door and proceed to yell at her. Even without her statement, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors, so it matters not that they seemed to be the ideal family to the outside world. John had an affair on his first wife while she was pregnant, his morals don't impress me much.


Not evidence of an intruder. John's shirt fibers were in her over-sized, staged underwear. I believe this fact trumps meaningless DNA found outside her underwear.



There was NO unexplained palm print on the ransom note. The only prints on the ransom note were Patsy Ramsey's prints.

The hair was Patsy Ramsey's hair.

The boot print belonged to Burke Ramsey.

Nothing in or on the suitcase showed evidence of an intruder.

The blow to her head was brutal, no doubt, but was it done on purpose? Still not evidence of an intruder.

The FBI concluded that the evidence of sexual abuse was meant to mislead investigators and that trauma to JBR's privates was not idicative of someone desiring sexual gratification - no pedophile.

The FBI said the garrote mark on JBR's neck was even, so no struggle while the garroting took place.



December 26, 2006, was the first murder in Boulder that year, if I remember correctly. They are not all that busy and have probably already looked into your research - they have the advantage of knowing the facts and true evidence, which should expedite the results even further!

The fact that you say you are an attorney, a filmaker, private investigator and crime writer should, at the very least, get you some face time with the BPD...have you asked for a meeting?




Now that will buy some time. Boulder is rife with homeless and colorful characters.

My post is not meant to be off topic, it is for clarification purposes only.

Now THIS is probably what AKWILKS was hoping for: an intelligent argument.

 

[vlpate]

Wow! How can you say the DNA means nothing? If you read Mark Beckner's statement it totally contradicts this. Exonerating the Ramsey's may have been presumptuous but to say the DNA means nothing is an opinion only.

I enjoy your site. And I appreciate being a member here and I hope that continues. I have even defended your site because of issues concerning this case. I do worry though that discussion is not really tolerated. More leeway seems to be shown for RDI.

Here's an interesting article on DNA. Based on the under-handed way this case was handled by the powers that be in boulder, and Lin Wood and his crack team of investigators, I wouldn't find it hard to believe the DNA was falsely presented as viable.

http://www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/0/6285f6867724e1e685257124006f9177

I don't know why IDI's think the DNA is so important when there is a ransom note that was written and left by the killer.

Patsy's pad, Patsy's pen, Patsy's handwriting, Patsy's fingerprints (even though she said she never touched the note. Bonus: Patsy's paintbrush used as a garrote and as an object to molest JonBenet.

 

[Roy23]

Here's an interesting article on DNA. Based on the under-handed way this case was handled by the powers that be in boulder, and Lin Wood and his crack team of investigators, I wouldn't find it hard to believe the DNA was falsely presented as viable.

http://www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/0/6285f6867724e1e685257124006f9177

I don't know why IDI's think the DNA is so important when there is a ransom note that was written and left by the killer.

Patsy's pad, Patsy's pen, Patsy's handwriting, Patsy's fingerprints (even though she said she never touched the note. Bonus: Patsy's paintbrush used as a garrote and as an object to molest JonBenet.

For the 1 millionth time, the handwriting is not and can not be proven to be exclusively Patsy's. This is documented all over the interwebs.

 

[vlpate]

For the 1 millionth time, the handwriting is not and can not be proven to be exclusively Patsy's. This is documented all over the interwebs.

Please source the documentation.

 

[Roy23]

Please source the documentation.

Ain't gonna waste my time with you on this.

 

[vlpate]

Ain't gonna waste my time with you on this.

This has nothing to do with me...anyway:


#27
August 24, 2006, 12:02 am, Thu Aug 24 0:02:25 CDT 2006
Cherokee
FFJ Senior Member/Moderator

Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,730

Independent Confirmation of the Handwriting Analysis


Gideon Epstein - Forensic Document Examiner:

“Based on the presently available documents, there are strong indications that Patsy Ramsey is the author of the ransom note.”

David S. Liebman - Certified Document Examiner:

“There are far too many similarities and consistencies revealed in the handwriting of Patsy Ramsey and
the ransom note for it to be coincidence. In light of the number of comparisons and similarities between Patsy Ramsey and the ransom note writer (51), the chances of a third party also sharing the same characteristics is astronomical. In my professional opinion Patsy Ramsey is the ransom note writer.”

Tom Miller - Attorney, Court Qualified Expert Witness in Questioned Documents:

“Based upon available exemplars compared to the purported "ransom" note in the JonBenét Ramsey murder, the handwriting is probably that of Patsy Ramsey.”

Chet Ubowski - Colorado Bureau of Investigation Handwriting Expert:

Chet Ubowski wrote, "This handwriting showed indications that the writer was Patsy Ramsey.'' He is said to have found 24 of 26 letters in the ransom note which matched exemplars from Patsy Ramsey.

Cina L. Wong - Certified Document Examiner:

“I have made careful examination and comparison of the ‘ransom’ note and the exemplars of Patsy Ramsey. I have reached the conclusion that the handwritings and ‘ransom’ note were very probably written by the same person…it is my professional opinion that Patsy Ramsey very likely wrote the ‘ransom’ note.”

Larry F. Ziegler - Forensic Document Examiner:

“It was determined and is still determined by myself that Patsy Ramsey is the writer of the ransom note.”


http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6404&page=3

 

[Roy23]

This has nothing to do with me...anyway:


#27
August 24, 2006, 12:02 am, Thu Aug 24 0:02:25 CDT 2006
Cherokee
FFJ Senior Member/Moderator

Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,730

Independent Confirmation of the Handwriting Analysis


Gideon Epstein - Forensic Document Examiner:

“Based on the presently available documents, there are strong indications that Patsy Ramsey is the author of the ransom note.”

David S. Liebman - Certified Document Examiner:

“There are far too many similarities and consistencies revealed in the handwriting of Patsy Ramsey and
the ransom note for it to be coincidence. In light of the number of comparisons and similarities between Patsy Ramsey and the ransom note writer (51), the chances of a third party also sharing the same characteristics is astronomical. In my professional opinion Patsy Ramsey is the ransom note writer.”

Tom Miller - Attorney, Court Qualified Expert Witness in Questioned Documents:

“Based upon available exemplars compared to the purported "ransom" note in the JonBenét Ramsey murder, the handwriting is probably that of Patsy Ramsey.”

Chet Ubowski - Colorado Bureau of Investigation Handwriting Expert:

Chet Ubowski wrote, "This handwriting showed indications that the writer was Patsy Ramsey.'' He is said to have found 24 of 26 letters in the ransom note which matched exemplars from Patsy Ramsey.

Cina L. Wong - Certified Document Examiner:

“I have made careful examination and comparison of the ‘ransom’ note and the exemplars of Patsy Ramsey. I have reached the conclusion that the handwritings and ‘ransom’ note were very probably written by the same person…it is my professional opinion that Patsy Ramsey very likely wrote the ‘ransom’ note.”

Larry F. Ziegler - Forensic Document Examiner:

“It was determined and is still determined by myself that Patsy Ramsey is the writer of the ransom note.”


http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6404&page=3

I am not even going to get into detail. This is exactly why I will never consider your leader SD as leader of the RDI's. If you knew better you would know several things that were common sense. First of all, NO ONE with clout as an expert in this field woud ever say this is a match. The experts in this field would never do so. All they do is eliminate suspects, not match them. In this case some similarities were found with Patsy's writing. nothing more nothing less. Many examiners excluded her and could not exclude her.

That is all we can say and I am being liberal about it. For anyone to say that the handwriting is a match is a f'ing moron. And if I have seen the note and Patsy's writings. If I believe it were the same I would be RDI with an accompliss on the DNA. It is just not the case.

 

[DeeDee249]

I am not even going to get into detail. This is exactly why I will never consider your leader SD as leader of the RDI's. If you knew better you would know several things that were common sense. First of all, NO ONE with clout as an expert in this field woud ever say this is a match. The experts in this field would never do so. All they do is eliminate suspects, not match them. In this case some similarities were found with Patsy's writing. nothing more nothing less. Many examiners excluded her and could not exclude her.

That is all we can say and I am being liberal about it. For anyone to say that the handwriting is a match is a f'ing moron. And if I have seen the note and Patsy's writings. If I believe it were the same I would be RDI with an accompliss on the DNA. It is just not the case.

Roy, as much as I respect you and your opinions, though they differ from mine, I am not a f'ing moron. When I look at the exemplars, Patsy is a prefect match to the RN. Not every exemplar is identical to the note, because it may have been written with the opposite hand, but the document examiners look at other things as well, spacing between letters, and the angle at which connecting letter are joined. For the most part, when I look, I am amazed anyone thinks anyone BUT Patsy wrote it.

 

[Roy23]

Roy, as much as I respect you and your opinions, though they differ from mine, I am not a f'ing moron. When I look at the exemplars, Patsy is a prefect match to the RN. Not every exemplar is identical to the note, because it may have been written with the opposite hand, but the document examiners look at other things as well, spacing between letters, and the angle at which connecting letter are joined. For the most part, when I look, I am amazed anyone thinks anyone BUT Patsy wrote it.

DeeDee,

There is an enormous difference between thinking Patsy wrote it and saying it is identical. It is not a match. We are only left to an opinion. You say it may be written with opposite hand. That also means it may not be. There are many handwriting experts that get involved with these cases. There have been several in the Zodiac case that have been proven to be unreliable. Nanette Barto being the latest.

 

[vlpate]

I am not even going to get into detail. This is exactly why I will never consider your leader SD as leader of the RDI's.

While I respect and often reference SD's knowledge and admire his passion, he is not my leader - I've believed RDI since December 26, 1996 and I've never faltered in that belief. Nothing about an IDI theory makes sense to me, nothing - and this is enforced by the facts and zero evidence left by an intruder. The ransom note is the one "clue" to something personal left by the killer or the person aiding the killer, and the Ramsey's have never been big on finding out who wrote it - they've only tried to eliminate themselves. Lin Wood said his experts eliminated Patsy, but never presented documents to back those claims up. Lin Wood earned big money protecting his clients, BIG money to the point these two millionaires were going broke at one time.

If you knew better you would know several things that were common sense. First of all, NO ONE with clout as an expert in this field would ever say this is a match. The experts in this field would never do so. All they do is eliminate suspects, not match them.

Exactly, so to say they "believe" it was Patsy, is as good as saying it was Patsy. As far as eliminating her, no expert on record, ever has.

In this case some similarities were found with Patsy's writing. nothing more nothing less. Many examiners excluded her and could not exclude her.

To state that "some" similarities were found makes me think you read forums only and not evidence - many similarities have been found by official document examiners - this is undisputed. Again, source for those who excluded her?

That is all we can say and I am being liberal about it. For anyone to say that the handwriting is a match is a f'ing moron.

Color me an f'ing moron :chicken:

And if I have seen the note and Patsy's writings. If I believe it were the same I would be RDI with an accompliss on the DNA. It is just not the case

Were you a certified document examiner, the fact that you saw it yourself and do not think Patsy wrote it, might impress me, but you are not and I am neither swayed nor impressed by your analysis.

 

[vlpate]

DeeDee,

There is an enormous difference between thinking Patsy wrote it and saying it is identical. It is not a match. We are only left to an opinion. You say it may be written with opposite hand. That also means it may not be. There are many handwriting experts that get involved with these cases. There have been several in the Zodiac case that have been proven to be unreliable. Nanette Barto being the latest.

No one said it was identical, no one. It doesn't have to be identical to deemed a very close match.

writing experts? To whom are you referring?

 

[Roy23]

No one said it was identical, no one. It doesn't have to be identical to deemed a very close match.

writing experts? To whom are you referring?

This is no different than most fiber evidence. With DNA you can get a match, not fiber evidence. Was it you that said no evidence was found of an intruder? I think so.

Two questions.

1. Is DNA evidence in three to five places including the childs underwear evidence of an intruder?

2. Whose fault is it that a cleaning crew came in and cleaned up? And whose fault is it that the Ramsey's found their own child in their house?

 

[Roy23]

Roy, as much as I respect you and your opinions, though they differ from mine, I am not a f'ing moron. When I look at the exemplars, Patsy is a prefect match to the RN. Not every exemplar is identical to the note, because it may have been written with the opposite hand, but the document examiners look at other things as well, spacing between letters, and the angle at which connecting letter are joined. For the most part, when I look, I am amazed anyone thinks anyone BUT Patsy wrote it.

To All,

I need to apologize for my verbage. The last thing this forum needs is for me to get banned for even a suggestion I am cursing at them. But the fault falls on me for typing the words. I am not calling anyone specifically that name. It is not that way the post was intended.

I take pride on a board with a large majority of RDI's that I have a respect with them. It doesn't mean I don't agree with what i write. But I have to follow rules. And I believe most of you want me to stay here regardless of our differences. Handwriting analysis is a joke in the Ramsey case. Sue me.

But I am sorry If I offended anyone. I love you all, or at least most of you. :seeya:

 

[vlpate]

This is no different than most fiber evidence. With DNA you can get a match, not fiber evidence. Was it you that said no evidence was found of an intruder? I think so.

Two questions.

1. Is DNA evidence in three to five places including the childs underwear evidence of an intruder?

Patsy's sweater fibers were found on the duct tape and fibers from John's shirt in her underwear - seems not to be proof they were involved, so no, the DNA is meaningless. If the DNA ends up belonging to a factory worker in China, does that mean that factory worker killed her? No. The sketchy DNA is NOT proof of an intruder.

2. Whose fault is it that a cleaning crew came in and cleaned up? And whose fault is it that the Ramsey's found their own child in their house?

Absolutely not proof of an intruder. Not even sure what you mean by cleaning crew...the guests? Not hardly enough to clean ALL forensic evidence in a scene that involved.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Yep just pull any random name out of the phone book and you will likely get a known pedophile

The killer could be an unknown pedophile. I would guess that that category has more members than known pedophiles. And the killer isn't necessarily a pedophile.

last stated destination for 1995 and 1996 Colorado

Even if true, Colorado is big state and 1995 isn't December 96. This doesn't mean much, unless they said Boulder or maybe Denver area. I don't think Boulder is a big draw for Mormons.

with a history of molesting 3 to 6 year old girls with a belief that God has ordered him to do nighttime home invasion kidnappings of beautiful and talented blonde girls who live in large homes in wealthy areas

Kidnappings without ransom notes, and if he were to leave a ransom note, you can bet there'd be something religious about it.

often on holidays,

What holiday was Smart taken on? I believe the Smart incident came after Ramsey.

who come prepared with duct tape for their mouths and cord to bind them,

That's a match, but that's part of the the basic kidnapper's kit.

and who with his female accomplice use words like "Hence", "We represent", "Individuals", "southern", "am", "As well as", "Being", "Deviate", "Instructions", "For Burial", "You Stand", "In Any Way" and a half dozen other words or stylistics in the JonBenet Ramsey ransom note, and also ends his capital "M" 's with a ski slope flourish.

This is the weakest part of your theory. There's nothing uncommon about those terms (by the way, the note says "deviation") and the handwriting is nothing alike. Seriously, what's so unique about those terms? "am"????

Yes sir just pull any random name out of the phone book, and thats what you will get!

Pulling a name at random you'll get someone who has no known connection to this case, just like BDM.