The Misdirection and Deception of the DNA

[DeeDee249]

but the test also mentioned that he cant be included... so how do you explain that?

He can't be INCLUDED because of his age. Colorado law prohibits anyone under the age of 10 from being indicted, accused, or in any way implicated in a crime. BR was just shy of his 10th birthday, so he was 9 when this happened. That is why even though the Grand Jury knew the parents covered up the crime (18 counts were mentioned, 9 for each parent) including "failure to prevent abuse leading to death", and even though LE knows what happened, they can never even mention BR in association with the death of JB.

 

[JmeBrown]

I am very new to this forum. I am reading and trying to catch up on all this. My husband and I were discussing this case the other night and we had a few curiosities come up. We wondered if anyone else had ever thought of any of these things as well. If I am putting it in the wrong forum I apologize ahead of time. This is my first post on WS. We saw a story the other day about a man who photographed JBR a few days before she died. He was found with tons of child *advertiser censored* on his computer. He even lived close to them until right before it happened. my husband thinks that may have something to do with it. I can't help but wonder if maybe it's like here in Texas, cheerleader moms have been known to harm and or kill the competition so that their daughters can win. So I can't help but wonder in one way if maybe this was all a set up from another pageant parent getting back at PR and framing them to get JBR out of the circuit so to speak. Lastly, the changing clothes out of pajamas into pants and a shirt, that sounds like someone who even though may have done it, did not want JBR to be found indecent. That points me to PR. As for the urine soaked pants, If you ever have been around some one who passes away, the body relaxes and the organs release, urine and sometimes feces. So it is possible that JBR did not wet herself, but that may have happened after the fact. Just our thoughts. I hope we do not offend any one on here and I am so sorry it was so long and rambly.

 

[UKGuy]

I am very new to this forum. I am reading and trying to catch up on all this. My husband and I were discussing this case the other night and we had a few curiosities come up. We wondered if anyone else had ever thought of any of these things as well. If I am putting it in the wrong forum I apologize ahead of time. This is my first post on WS. We saw a story the other day about a man who photographed JBR a few days before she died. He was found with tons of child *advertiser censored* on his computer. He even lived close to them until right before it happened. my husband thinks that may have something to do with it. I can't help but wonder if maybe it's like here in Texas, cheerleader moms have been known to harm and or kill the competition so that their daughters can win. So I can't help but wonder in one way if maybe this was all a set up from another pageant parent getting back at PR and framing them to get JBR out of the circuit so to speak. Lastly, the changing clothes out of pajamas into pants and a shirt, that sounds like someone who even though may have done it, did not want JBR to be found indecent. That points me to PR. As for the urine soaked pants, If you ever have been around some one who passes away, the body relaxes and the organs release, urine and sometimes feces. So it is possible that JBR did not wet herself, but that may have happened after the fact. Just our thoughts. I hope we do not offend any one on here and I am so sorry it was so long and rambly.

JmeBrown,
Welcome, hope you hang around.

my husband thinks that may have something to do with it.

Probably not as there is no forensic evidence linking to him/

I can't help but wonder if maybe it's like here in Texas, cheerleader moms have been known to harm and or kill the competition so that their daughters can win.

Might have been, you should read James Kolar's book: Foreign Faction for an overview of the case, could be your local lending library will have it?

that sounds like someone who even though may have done it, did not want JBR to be found indecent.

Yes, spot on. The pants or longjohns belonged to her brother Burke Ramsey and her underwear, Bloomingdale's size-12's, had been intended as a Christmas gift for Patsy's niece who was nearly twice JonBenet's age, check out the pictures.

Bloomingdales size-12:

Burke Ramsey's longjohns:

So those size-12's are a red flag since if Patsy was redressing JonBenet why signal the fact that someone has changed JonBenet's underwear when any old pair of her own size-6 underwear will do just fine?

Patsy says she put the longjohns on JonBenet after the White's party:
BPD 1998 Patsy Interview Excerpt

3 TRIP DEMUTH: Patsy, why the long underwear?

4 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, I remember I was digging

5 around for something. I was trying to find the pink

6 ones she wore the night before. I couldn't put my hand

7 on them right quick. And so I went to these drawers

8 looking for the pajamas, and she was just laying there,

9 so I didn't want to raise her up and get everything off

10 of her to put a long nightgown, so looking for pajamas

11 bottoms to put on her. I couldn't find any, and the

12 long underwear pants were in there drawer, so I got

13 those.

Coroner Meyer concluded JonBenet had been wiped down after being subjected to Sexual Contact and Digital Penetration.

So why would an intruder bother with all this staging, never mind knowing where to find the Bloomingdale's size-12 underwear?

.