The actual vs. desired outcome

[Ames]

"Fibers matched to the red sweater Patsy was wearing..."

This is tabloid junk plain and simple. Anybody who knows anything about fiber forensics will tell you that you cant match fibers to a garment. There's too many fibers and too many garments for that. Fibers, they say, can only be found to be 'consistent with' other fibers.

Why do you think Mr. Levin stated 'We believe' instead of 'We have found'? Something is fishy with that one. No wonder their lawyers wouldn't allow it.

Maybe you have one more link? Other than that one interview, I can't find anything, so the red fibers in the paint tote idea seems uncorroborated.

This was not from a Tabloid...

 

[Ames]

From CBS NEWS website::


"But no expert could eliminate Patsy Ramsey as the writer of the ransom note. No problem, says Smit: “You’re always going to have similarities in handwriting.”

 

[Solace]

This was not from a Tabloid...

Holdon has read one book, if that, and it would be Death of Innocence - written by the murderer. Does it get any better than that?

 

[Squishified]

Holdon has read one book, if that, and it would be Death of Innocence - written by the murderer. Does it get any better than that?

Well, then, I have to give some credit to Holdon. I have yet to make it through the whole book (I got it last year). I feel nauseous when I read it.

 

[Ames]

"Fibers matched to the red sweater Patsy was wearing..."

This is tabloid junk plain and simple. Anybody who knows anything about fiber forensics will tell you that you cant match fibers to a garment. There's too many fibers and too many garments for that. Fibers, they say, can only be found to be 'consistent with' other fibers.

Why do you think Mr. Levin stated 'We believe' instead of 'We have found'? Something is fishy with that one. No wonder their lawyers wouldn't allow it.

Maybe you have one more link? Other than that one interview, I can't find anything, so the red fibers in the paint tote idea seems uncorroborated.

http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/Patsy%20Ramsey#IncriminatingEvidenceRelatedtoPatsyRamsey

1. Fiber Evidence. Fibers matched to the red sweater Patsy was wearing that night were found in places key to the crime: the paintbrush caddy she kept her art supplies in, the blanket used to wrap JonBenet's body, on the sticky side of the duct tape placed over JonBenet's mouth, and tied into both knots of the ligature used to strangle JonBenet. Patsy denies she ever went near these places wearing that sweater. In the interviews with Boulder prosecutors in August, 2000, prosecutor Bruce Levin summed up the evidence: MR. LEVIN: "I think that is probably fair. Based on the state of the art scientific testing, we believe the fibers from her jacket were found in the paint tray, were found tied into the ligature found on JonBenet's neck, were found on the blanket that she is wrapped in, were found on the duct tape that is found on the mouth, and the question is, can she explain to us how those fibers appeared in those places that are associated with her daughter's death. And I understand you are not going to answer those."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is another one...

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


SNIPPED>>




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.


I think that its pretty clear that those fibers were from Patsy's jacket....

 

[Ames]

Holdon has read one book, if that, and it would be Death of Innocence - written by the murderer. Does it get any better than that?

OHHHHH OKAY....suddenly everything is much clearer to me now!!

 

[Solace]

OHHHHH OKAY....suddenly everything is much clearer to me now!!

Ask any one of the CL posters what they have read and they will all, if not all, leave out Thomas' book. Chris Mattews of CNBC had somene on his show talking about Steve Thomas and Chris said well I won't read his book because he is a detective on the case - Good Chris, you usually come off as a moron anyway, screaming your way through an interview and basically spitting at the guest.

I read his book - I don't agree with everything - e.g. he loves Eller. As far as I am concerned Eller made many mistakes and should be accountable. Schiller does not have all the facts correct either and he does not deny that. But they are informative books and should be read, imo.

I am not crazy about Hodges books but have them because I am a true believer of the subconscious making all the decisions.

And there are tons of articles written on this case and information from forensics who have made statements that counter statements made as fact, e.g. THE DNA. It is obvious that Holdon has not read any of it.


Holdon, why don't you click on over to Forums For Justice and start educating yourself before you make any more of a fool of yourself with your ludicrous statements regarding this case. And another thing, where is your friend Callan? You remember the one who thought there had to be blood all over the place from the head wound. Another assumption proved wrong.

 

[JMO8778]

http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/Patsy Ramsey#IncriminatingEvidenceRelatedtoPatsyRamsey

1. Fiber Evidence. Fibers matched to the red sweater Patsy was wearing that night were found in places key to the crime: the paintbrush caddy she kept her art supplies in, the blanket used to wrap JonBenet's body, on the sticky side of the duct tape placed over JonBenet's mouth, and tied into both knots of the ligature used to strangle JonBenet. Patsy denies she ever went near these places wearing that sweater. In the interviews with Boulder prosecutors in August, 2000, prosecutor Bruce Levin summed up the evidence: MR. LEVIN: "I think that is probably fair. Based on the state of the art scientific testing, we believe the fibers from her jacket were found in the paint tray, were found tied into the ligature found on JonBenet's neck, were found on the blanket that she is wrapped in, were found on the duct tape that is found on the mouth, and the question is, can she explain to us how those fibers appeared in those places that are associated with her daughter's death. And I understand you are not going to answer those."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is another one...

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


SNIPPED>>




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.


I think that its pretty clear that those fibers were from Patsy's jacket....

yes and Hold,(as well as most other IDI's),would have us believe that forensic evidence can defy the laws of gravity,and they use simple,baseless statements for that argument,ie-it's all an 'everything is everywhere' approach.But it doesn't work that way.Pardon,but that's a very retarded view, IMO. And I don't see how they can expect anyone else to believe it,either,Patsy's fibers fell in specific spots,inc. being tied *into the ligature, due to this pesky thing called gravity that we have here on earth,much to IDI's chagrin.

 

[JMO8778]

The study of the subconscious mind fascinates me even though the psychological and behavioral sciences are more art than science. The ransom note was probably at least partially written from a subconcious level. It is erratic and scattered and there is always a possibility Patsy didn't write it. However, if you haven't already, try reading that note as if Patsy were writing John a letter intended to convey her true feelings. It makes an interesting study, particularly the last few lines. The line that tells John it's "all in his hands now" (or words to that effect) is a pretty good little ending.

I'd thought about that,too,let me ask you what you think of this statement from JR in DOI.p.304,pprback.(And I don't consider you argumentative,btw,we're just discussing,and I like everyone's input )
He talks about Thomas being so committed to the case,and then starts complaining, once again,that the focus was only on he and Patsy.Then he says 'but what if we hadn't killed her?'
I would have expected that line to read...'but we didn't kill her',not 'what if we hadn't killed her'.
I know he's trying to sound hypothetical,but it doesn't come off that way at all,IMO,and I wonder if his subconscious took over when he wrote that statement.

 

[Squishified]

JMO,
Good catch!

 

[Solace]

I'd thought about that,too,let me ask you what you think of this statement from JR in DOI.p.304,pprback.(And I don't consider you argumentative,btw,we're just discussing,and I like everyone's input )
He talks about Thomas being so committed to the case,and then starts complaining, once again,that the focus was only on he and Patsy.Then he says 'but what if we hadn't killed her?'
I would have expected that line to read...'but we didn't kill her',not 'what if we hadn't killed her'.
I know he's trying to sound hypothetical,but it doesn't come off that way at all,IMO,and I wonder if his subconscious took over when he wrote that statement.

Great catch. And their ghost writers did not catch it either.

 

[BOESP]

I'd thought about that,too,let me ask you what you think of this statement from JR in DOI.p.304,pprback.(And I don't consider you argumentative,btw,we're just discussing,and I like everyone's input )
He talks about Thomas being so committed to the case,and then starts complaining, once again,that the focus was only on he and Patsy.Then he says 'but what if we hadn't killed her?'
I would have expected that line to read...'but we didn't kill her',not 'what if we hadn't killed her'.
I know he's trying to sound hypothetical,but it doesn't come off that way at all,IMO,and I wonder if his subconscious took over when he wrote that statement.

In my opinion, John Ramsey made many subconscious comments. The "we" part could be explained by John thinking in terms of he and Patsy as a unit. A lot of married people say "we" when only one spouse actually participated. Since I believe John, at best, helped cover-up for Patsy, I can see the "we" statement being related to the cover-up.

I haven't decided exactly when I think John entered the picture concerning JonBenet's death and subsequent staging. I think he probably helped with events in the basement at the very least.

 

[Squishified]

Great catch. And their ghost writers did not catch it either.

Any idea who the ghost writer was? I just looked at my copy and it says nothing. I have just taken the book out after being disgusted with it months ago. I am actually near the end. Maybe I'll finish reading it today. If I feel like it..........

 

[Squishified]

In my opinion, John Ramsey made many subconscious comments. The "we" part could be explained by John thinking in terms of he and Patsy as a unit. A lot of married people say "we" when only one spouse actually participated. Since I believe John, at best, helped cover-up for Patsy, I can see the "we" statement being related to the cover-up.

I haven't decided exactly when I think John entered the picture concerning JonBenet's death and subsequent staging. I think he probably helped with events in the basement at the very least.[/quote]

Same here.

 

[Ames]

yes and Hold,(as well as most other IDI's),would have us believe that forensic evidence can defy the laws of gravity,and they use simple,baseless statements for that argument,ie-it's all an 'everything is everywhere' approach.But it doesn't work that way.Pardon,but that's a very retarded view, IMO. And I don't see how they can expect anyone else to believe it,either,Patsy's fibers fell in specific spots,inc. being tied *into the ligature, due to this pesky thing called gravity that we have here on earth,much to IDI's chagrin.

So, those particular fibers...from her red jacket...just FLOATED all the way down to the WC, and entwined themselves into the garotte and planted themselves inside of the paint tote. (IDI's would have us to believe that...anyway). Those particular fibers...from the SAME EXACT jacket...WOW...how much more ironic can you get???

 

[Squishified]

So, those particular fibers...from her red jacket...just FLOATED all the way down to the WC, and entwined themselves into the garotte and planted themselves inside of the paint tote. (IDI's would have us to believe that...anyway). Those particular fibers...from the SAME EXACT jacket...WOW...how much more ironic can you get???

Well, the poor intruder had to come in thru the little window naked, so I would imagine he needed a sweater.

 

[Ames]

I was thinking along those same lines last night when I realized that instead of trying to put facts together to figure out who killed JonBenet, Holdon's purpose is to support Ramsey innocence.

Me thinks that Holdon must be a family friend..or relative, of the Rams.

 

[Ames]

In my opinion, John Ramsey made many subconscious comments. The "we" part could be explained by John thinking in terms of he and Patsy as a unit. A lot of married people say "we" when only one spouse actually participated. Since I believe John, at best, helped cover-up for Patsy, I can see the "we" statement being related to the cover-up.

I haven't decided exactly when I think John entered the picture concerning JonBenet's death and subsequent staging. I think he probably helped with events in the basement at the very least.

Yeah, and the one that kind of pisses me off is...."WE are pregnant!". Until the man has labor and pops out a baby....then there is NO WE.

 

[Ames]

Well, the poor intruder had to come in thru the little window naked, so I would imagine he needed a sweater.

LOL...I guess he had to share Patsy's sweater with the other two naked intruders.

 

[Solace]

Any idea who the ghost writer was? I just looked at my copy and it says nothing. I have just taken the book out after being disgusted with it months ago. I am actually near the end. Maybe I'll finish reading it today. If I feel like it..........

It is truly hard to get through that book. How about the part where John says he had hoped the police would have been more discreet when they arrived.

I guess it is normal to have two couples and the Reverend come over by 6:25 that morning. Yeah, everyone does that - it is perfectly acceptable, no reason to be alarmed or discreet. Especially when the note says she will be beheaded. Don't worry about that Patsy, call everyone over.