The Ramseys are Cleared

[Silmarion]

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/jul/09/touch-dna-same-was-used-free-masters/

Thought this was interesting.

 

[angelwngs]

It is my understanding that the DNA in the underwear was mixed with Jonbenet's blood and this DNA was from saliva? At least that is what I recall. The DNA on the elastic waist band from the long johns was skin cells. Skin cells you can't see a stain that is why they do this touch DNA scraping technique, correct? Saliva and semen you can see some sort of stain that is how they know where is the best place to swab an item if they see something that looks suspicious. I definately no expert but maybe someone who understands this stuff can enlighten us.I don't know for sure but doesn't that mean if the underwear is a saliva stain and the waistband skin cells doesn't that elimate the chance that this is a innocent transfer? If it was a transfer wouldn't the waistband also have blood on it since that DNA they found in the panties was mixed with blood?

What do you typically see people who are holding a paint brush in their hand thinking about their next stroke do with the brush when painting?

They put the tip of the brush in their mouth... Saliva...DNA

The unknown male has held the brush... Skin cell DNA...

The killer takes this previously used by an unknown male paint brush from PR's paint caddy, holds it in two gloved hands and breaks it into two pieces.... Unknown male DNA is now transferred to the gloved hands of the killer.

The killer uses both gloved, unknown male contaminated DNA hands to pull down JBR's longjohns on both sides of her body...leaving touch DNA traces on both sides of her longjohns.

The killer inserts the broken end of the contaminated paintbrush into JBR causing trauma... The contaminated object of the trauma causes blood. The blood intermingles with the unknown male DNA and drops onto JBR's undies.

(No one knows for sure that PR did not accidently pick up some other person's used paintbrush brush by accident and bring it home with her as her own. It's also possible that some male borrowed her brush or assisted her when she was painting holdong her brush... The possibilities here are endless as to how unknown male dna got on a paintbrush.)

It is a possibility, IMO, rendering the unknown male DNA a red herring...It useless to clear or to convict anyone due to 'reasonable doubt'.

 

[magnolia]

You really think a cold blooded killer sat down, wrote the note, left the pad and placed the pen they used to write it back in a pencil holder?

Do you think a parent would kill their child, then turn around and write their own ransom note?

 

[snowqueen]

This is such great news that these people who have been judged, tried and convicted in the court of public opinion have finally been cleared. May Patsy and JBR rest in peace and maybe now Burke can live a normal life. I hope they find the killer now. Maybe now LE will start looking in the right places.

A voice of reason!!! :clap::clap:

 

[angelwngs]

John's shirt fibers were found in JB's panties. Care to explain that? I'm not buying the "laundry" theory.

In a dryer clothing often sticks to each other and have to be literally pulled apart from the dryer. If the size 12 undies were brand new and unwashed, as I am thinking that they probably were, the fibers from John's shirt could have come from JBR's long- johns which could have been dried with John's shirt...Her longjohns touched her panties.

It's a stretch that both items worn by two different family members on the night JBR died were dried in the same load of clothes and transferred fibers...but it's possible, IMO.

 

[Karole28]

Do you think a parent would kill their child, then turn around and write their own ransom note?

I don't think a random child murderer would. For sure.
Nor do I think would a burglar.

To cover up the murder of their child, absolutely I think a parent would, and did. (See link I provided earlier for lengthy analysis of ransom note vs. Patsy's handwriting)

 

[Karole28]

Isn't that something?

Some crazy guy is talking about his fantasies about Jonbenet - and John Ramsey doesn't even say that hearing about it makes him want to vomit!

Or kill him! (Which is what I'd want to do)

 

[angelwngs]

I have a couple of observations and I hope you all will bear with me. May mean something, may mean nothing but feedback is appreciated.

From Mary Lacys love letter to John Ramsey released today for public consumption:

"We became aware last summer that some private laboratories were conducting a new methodology described as "touch DNA."

I'm reminded when I read this that the Ramseys refused to take LE and FBI polygraph tests, instead hiring and paying professional polygraphers to administer private tests years after the crime. It took Patsy 3 tries to pass. Even the hired help couldn't help her with it. I believe John passed the first time. Mark Beckner released a statement about it saying the results would not be accepted by LE investigating this case.

My question here is , why is it ok to accept the results of a DNA test from a private laboratory on the findings of DNA and yet a polygraph administered by hired private polygraphers is not acceptable?

Seems to be a descrepency in protocol.
Or .....a difference in who is calling the shots and deciding which evidence is acceptable and which is not. It falls along the same lines as I said in a post before. Mary Lacy only released results that would give her justification to clear the Ramseys. Private polygraphs were not ok with Beckner, private laboratory results are A-OK with Mary Lacy. I wonder really how many items were tested before they came up with the results she was looking for. If she didn't test anything but the long johns, that is suspicious.

Excellent point and I repeat my question from an earlier post:

Did anyone see the 20/20 or 60 Minutes type program about 2 weeks ago which specifically highlighted the inaccuracies of genealogical DNA private testing labratories??? They basically concluded: If you sent one DNA sample to 6 different private labs you would receive 6 different and varying DNA results. The private lab is only as reliable and as accurate as the individual conducting the test and reproting the results.

 

[MrsMush99]

In a dryer clothing often sticks to each other and have to be literally pulled apart from the dryer. If the size 12 undies were brand new and unwashed, as I am thinking that they probably were, the fibers from John's shirt could have come from JBR's long- johns which could have been dried with John's shirt...Her longjohns touched her panties.

It's a stretch that both items worn by two different family members on the night JBR died were dried in the same load of clothes and transferred fibers...but it's possible, IMO.

John's shirt was never washed. I think he stated that. But John did say he carried her up the stairs after they got home. It is possible she got fibers on her and then when the killer undressed her they were transferred. I've been thinking about a lot of information. I've come to the conclusion that the need to do more DNA testing. Like on her shirt, the garrote, the blanket.

Right now I am of the opinion that someone that KNEW the Ramsey's, knew the layout of the house, knew they weren't going to be home, killed her. This was not a random killing, IMO.

 

[angelwngs]

Considering the fact that the panties were brand new out of a newly opened package....never made it to the laundry...where, by the way, John's wool sweater would have never been in the first place.
Makes it a bit hard to explain away.
This all just smells.

Dryell- Drycleaning using your dryer at home ... Freshen up stale woolen fabric in minutes...

Also, the fibers easily could have transferred from JR's sweater to the longjohns prior to the murder and when the killer pulled down the longjohns and pulled them back up, transferred JR's sweater fibers to the inside of the new panties, IMO

 

[MrsMush99]

Dryell- Drycleaning using your dryer at home ... Freshen up stale woolen fabric in minutes...

But is there evidence that Patsy used that???

 

[RiverRat]

STEVE THOMAS, FORMER BOULDER POLICE DETECTIVE: By the time I left the Boulder Police Department, June of 1998 -- Patsy, out of 73 suspects whose handwriting had been looked at, you were the only one that showed evidence to suggest authorship.

These people know better than anybody. Probable cause was not the issue in this case.

Patsy, you could have been arrested in this case.

PATSY RAMSEY, MOTHER OF JONBENET RAMSEY: I wish I had been and then we would have had a free and fair trial, and you would have met your Waterloo, Mr. Thomas. :boohoo:

If looks could kill, we would have lost poor Steve at that very moment!!!

 

[RainbowsAndGumdrops]

from the underwear and the tights???? Two different places same DNA??? I think that is probably unlikely. Unless the tights and the underwear came from the same worker in the same factor, which I doubt.

I read there was the drop of blood inside the panties. They now have skin cells from pulling on or off the panties that matches the DNA of the blood. That makes the blood DNA a lot more credible to me. I would have previously said the blood was planted.

 

[RainbowsAndGumdrops]

I agree that the DNA now firmly suggests someone else was there. Yet the presence of other DNA DOES NOT EXCLUDE OTHERS! I still think the Ramseys were involved. It just doesn't make sense any other way.

 

[MrsMush99]

I read there was the drop of blood inside the panties. They now have skin cells from pulling on or off the panties that matches the DNA of the blood. That makes the blood DNA a lot more credible to me. I would have previously said the blood was planted.

The blood is JonBenet's. There was DNA of an unknown male mixed with her blood, possibly saliva. But that DNA matches the DNA they lifted off the long johns.

 

[Wudge]

Nancy is a trip..she is pissy one second and then so sweet to her callers, then back to berating most of the people on her panel LOL

Nancy is delusional. Her sidekick, Wendy Murphy is a fourth-tier toilet attorney with a brain to match.

Well Wendy, what do you think of John Ramsey? He's a pedophile!

What about Santa Clause. He's also a pedophile!

The Easter Bunny? Another scummy pedophile!

 

[Silmarion]

Angelwings

I am a painter. I never put the end of the stem of my brush in my mouth. Good grief! I don't know of any painter that does! There is paint on the end of a brush you can't get off even with turpentine. When you paint, you usually get some paint on your fingers, and that goes on the stem of the brush. The last place I would put any part of a paint brush would be in my mouth! :behindbar

My, the theories you guys do come up with.

Wudge, I do agree with you about Wendy Murphy. Heraldo Hysteric is a close 2nd. There is nothing in John or Patsy Ramsey's background to even suggest they had anything to do with their daughter's terrible murder, but the Media who has nothing better to do than convict anybody for anything (just look at what their doing to the candidates who are and were running for president) convinced a naive public from the beginning that the parents were guilty. Therefore the public who believe most any sensational thing they hear on TV have concocted every possible reason for agreeing with them Some of the theories I've read over the years about the parents are so outlandish, they bear no resemblance to reality.

I think we must start from the beginning which is that although sometimes a parent kills their child, the amount of murders of little children which can be attributed to the parents are infinitesimal compared to the vast majority who don't. And usually the parent who does, has a background of either previous crimes, insanity, alcoholism, poverty, drugs, or some other mental illness.

 

[RiverRat]

Nancy is delusional. Her sidekick, Wendy Murphy is a fourth-tier toilet attorney with a brain to match.

Well Wendy, what do you think of John Ramsey? He's a pedophile!

What about Santa Clause. He's also a pedophile!

The Easter Bunny? Another scummy pedophile!

Aha.....that's how you can believe in The Intruder, but he is just another tall tale like Santa and The Easter Bunny......a cover-story for the Parents!

 

[wallflower67]

I can't ignore the mountain of evidence against the Ramseys. But if John Ramsey repeatedly sexually abused his daughter, he still may not have been the pervert who killed her.

At the same time, I still think there could be legitimate reasons as to how the DNA could have been on the long johns. If she wore them ANYwhere else...to a pageant, etc, some adult could have picked them up to move them over, or help Patsy get their things together.

And then if the DNA on the long johns touched the panties as JBR was being dressed, then that DNA could have gotten on the panties.

We are not talking an actual finger print, right? Just some shedded skin cells? Shedded skin cells could be everywhere.

I"m sure they couldn't DNA test EVERYone the Ramsey's knew.

It's hard for me to discount all the other evidence against the Ramseys.

I can't remember, but did they ever get phone records to see if PR could have called someone to help her cover it up? If I remember correctly, the Ramseys didn't want to provide their phone records but eventually consented to do so, or were forced to provide them.

I do think this DNA is enough to legally exonerate the Ramseys. I do think if I was on a jury, i couldn't say they were guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I would still have plenty of doubts, though.

 

[MrsMush99]

I can't ignore the mountain of evidence against the Ramseys. But if John Ramsey repeatedly sexually abused his daughter, he still may not have been the pervert who killed her.

At the same time, I still think there could be legitimate reasons as to how the DNA could have been on the long johns. If she wore them ANYwhere else...to a pageant, etc, some adult could have picked them up to move them over, or help Patsy get their things together.

And then if the DNA on the long johns touched the panties as JBR was being dressed, then that DNA could have gotten on the panties.

We are not talking an actual finger print, right? Just some shedded skin cells? Shedded skin cells could be everywhere.

I"m sure they couldn't DNA test EVERYone the Ramsey's knew.

It's hard for me to discount all the other evidence against the Ramseys.

I can't remember, but did they ever get phone records to see if PR could have called someone to help her cover it up? If I remember correctly, the Ramseys didn't want to provide their phone records but eventually consented to do so, or were forced to provide them.

I do think this DNA is enough to legally exonerate the Ramseys. I do think if I was on a jury, i couldn't say they were guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I would still have plenty of doubts, though.

According to Steve Thomas, John Ramsey was NOT molesting JonBenet.

One of the suspects Thomas said he looked at thoroughly, and eliminated as the killer, was John Ramsey. Initially investigators thought Ramsey had been molesting his daughter, but "there was no pathology, no personality, no history and no evidence indicating any history" that he ever molested any of his children, or anyone else's, Thomas said.

http://extras.denverpost.com/news/jon041000a.htm