The Ramseys are Cleared

[thefragile7393]

Declared innocent?

I think the DA might feel this proves their innocence but unfortunately to people who have been paying attention all along, this won't convince them.


Btw, OJ was declared innocent also.

In certain people's minds, Scott Peterson is quite innocent as well.

I agree with you that this was ritualistic abuse. The garroting was to simulate orgasm. This is often the case with ritualistic pedophilia. She wasn't meant to die. They went too far. That is why there was such an attempt to cover things up. No doubt that was someone else's DNA. When you are having a satanic, ritualistic party, there are usually several people involved.

Oh good grief. I'll believe the intruder theory before I believe that.

 

[Medea]

Usually perps that cover a victim in some way are perps that know the victim.

I agree with you that this was ritualistic abuse. The garroting was to simulate orgasm. This is often the case with ritualistic pedophilia. She wasn't meant to die. They went too far. That is why there was such an attempt to cover things up. No doubt that was someone else's DNA. When you are having a satanic, ritualistic party, there are usually several people involved.

And who is going to ritualistically abuse a child in their own home who wasn't meant to die and who doesn't bring any of his or her own instruments??

My opinion is that the restraints, tape, garrott were all done after she was unconscious, and the "perp" --that's a hysterical Patsy Ramsey in my view--thought she was already dead.

 

[Details]

Pedophiles are all about image and fantasy - pretending the child is a sex partner who wants it, looking for the pretty, innocence of a child. Just like the garroting, redressing her to me is to for the pedophile to remember her like that, the cute little girl. Couey put her in her grave with her favorite stuffed animal.

It's personal, all right, and no doubt he believed he knew her, in his sick demented fantasy world.

 

[Medea]

And this is very sad.


I've always been a bit in the middle, leaning towards an intruder, but I could see why there was suspicion. But DNA in two places - that is sufficient.

Not for me, the totality of the evidence tells me that it was not an intruder but a member of the Ramsey household that staged the kidnapping.

 

[Rhett]

Maybe JonBenet had come in contact with another Santa at the parade, the mall, school, etc. and he was the Santa that was coming to see her. Just because Patsy only associated McReynolds as "the" Santa doesn't mean that JonBenet couldn't have come in contact with another Santa. I also agree that the person that wrote the ransom note(if it truly wasn't Patsy) was in the home before the Ramsey's came back from the party. He/she had plenty of time to write the note. I also believe something happened or he/she changed his mind and he didn't kidnap JonBenet.

 

[Wudge]

Not for me, the totality of the evidence tells me that it was not an intruder but a member of the Ramsey household that staged the kidnapping.

I suspect that the cable crimetainment tabloid shows will be looking for people willing to go on TV and declare that one or more of the Ramseys killed Jon Benet.

 

[Medea]

Pedophiles are all about image and fantasy - pretending the child is a sex partner who wants it, looking for the pretty, innocence of a child. Just like the garroting, redressing her to me is to for the pedophile to remember her like that, the cute little girl. Couey put her in her grave with her favorite stuffed animal.

It's personal, all right, and no doubt he believed he knew her, in his sick demented fantasy world.

Okay, so you think the intruder knew the family and was a pedophile. So, instead of taking the girl out of the house, this pedophile spends quite a bit of time abusing her, restraining her, paintbrushes...all of the tools he wanted were right there in the house...then taking her clothes off and then redressing her, moving her to a different room, and then I assume accidentally somehow bashes her in the head, and then in his panic, after accidentally killing the object of his desire who he abused in the home instead of abducting her he then goes back, writes a practice ransom note, then throws it away, then writes the ransom note, or, alternatively, did all of this prior to the Ramsey's returning home and was hidden in the house earlier. And coincidentally poor Patsy Ramsey can't be excluded as the author of that note.

No way. I don't believe it. There is often unidentified DNA, it doesn't mean the owner of the DNA is the perpetrator especially when almost all other evidence points to someone else.

Oh and the pedophile doesn't actually rape her, either.

 

[RiverRat]

...and her timing is almost exactly the same of year as in the John Mark Karr 'episode'...

I am not going to let her screw up yet another of my summers with her trivial nonsense...

At least you have a choice! :clap: I have to keep on keeping on, but at least this one doesn't have my blood pressure skyrocketing with a suspect that really isn't a suspect after all.

 

[jubie]

Declared innocent?

I think the DA might feel this proves their innocence but unfortunately to people who have been paying attention all along, this won't convince them.


Btw, OJ was declared innocent also.

Yeah, OJ came to my mind right away too.

The pineapple, ransom note, and staged crime scene don't just now conveniently vanish for everyone that's going to jump up and down insisting the case is solved and the R's innocent. This is just more smoke and mirrors in an already botched case. I honestly now believe it will never really be solved.


It amazes me how simple it is to explain the whole thing involving the R's but how much imagination it takes to come up with an intruder.


What a massive injustice.

 

[Grainne Dhu]

I've thought (and argued for years on various fora) that the Ramseys were innocent.

My theory is that the intruder got into their home before they came home that evening. His plan was to kidnap her and he wrote the note while he was waiting for them to come home and then settle down for the night.

If it was someone who knew them, he discovered the layout of the house during previous visit(s)--the Ramseys entertained frequently. It may not have been someone they knew socially, it could have been a delvery man, someone who did some odd jobs for them, something like that. If it was a stranger who had been stalking JonBenet, I think he had probably been in the house before, possibly while everyone was asleep (a lot of thrill seeker in this one).

I think the pineapple was a red herring; JonBenet got herself a snack and went back to bed.

She was taken out of her bedroom, possibly stun gunned (particularly if the perp was a stranger). He got her down to the basement, dropping off the note on the way downstairs. When he was in the basement with JonBenet, she started to come to, cried out, he panicked and silenced her by bashing her head on something.

Then, in his eyes, she was "a broken toy." He waited a few minutes, listening to see if anyone heard JonBenet. No one did, so he molested her, then decided to garrot her when he realised she was still breathing (the head blow was going to be fatal but that would not have been obvious).

My suspicion is that this guy has travelled on from Boulder and committed other crimes. Remember Joseph Duncan? After he was caught with Shasta Groene, they discovered that his fingerprint matched a fingerprint from the Anthony Martinez killing. It was a stunner because he'd never been a suspect and no one expected some loser from Minnesota who committed a horrendous crime in Idaho to have anything to do with Anthony Martinez's death.

 

[Medea]

Yeah, OJ came to my mind right away too.

The pineapple, ransom note, and staged crime scene don't just now conveniently vanish for everyone that's going to jump up and down insisting the case is solved and the R's innocent. This is just more smoke and mirrors in an already botched case. I honestly now believe it will never really be solved.


It amazes me how simple it is to explain the whole thing involving the R's but how much imagination it takes to come up with an intruder.


What a massive injustice.

It was never going to be solved. The Boulder DA's...none of them have ever wanted to prosecute the Ramseys. This is why the evidence was so selectively presented to the grand jury, to ensure they wouldn't indict and why no report, if I am remembering right, was issued. This DA has said from the beginning she believes it was an intruder, she hasn't been looking at the Ramseys from the beginning.

 

[Nedthan Johns]

This is pretty big news. Just got word and not up to speed on touch DNA, anyone care to elaborate?

Because of Lacy's ridiculous fiasco with Karr, I find this hard to believe.

 

[Details]

Handwriting evidence is weak even when they say they've got a match, "can't be excluded" means very little to me.

I think he was a pedophile who followed the child pagents, as part of his fantasy life. I think he may have to some degree known of the family. I think he planned to kidnap her, get some nice ransom money, and have a child to rape for a few days. I think he thought he knew her, just like a deranged stalker of a movie star thinks they know the movie star - not that he did know her. You know the type of thing - "The way she posed at the end of the runway, that was just for me!". I think he wrote the note, went up and got JBR, saw the tools of his trade - or at least something he could easily adapt into them, decided to go for it, and bashed her head when she wasn't responding as in his fantasies, dressed her as his little doll, or maybe not realizing she was all the way dead, not just unconscious at first, and left.


DNA in a dead girl's panties, liquid, in blood - that's insanely strong evidence to me. Only the fairly unlikely possibility that it was from manufacturing made it possible to ignore. But when you add in that exact same DNA being elsewhere on her clothes - that possibility vanishes, and to me, you are left with the clear and unconditional fact that this is the killer.


There are a few options there that include the parents - but that is one of the killers at the very least. Someone could say they knew and allowed it, and wrote the note to cover - but that sounds too improbable to me, without any evidence of it.


Not so long ago, many believed poor Jessica's father or grandfather killed her - it was too improbable that someone snuck into the house, and the grandfather just so happens to have had related problems in the past. If Couey had never been found, they'd still be considered no doubt guilty by some - the coincidence of a dead girl with a questionable family would be too much.

 

[RiverRat]

This is pretty big news. Just got word and not up to speed on touch DNA, anyone care to elaborate?

Because of Lacy's ridiculous fiasco with Karr, I find this hard to believe.

Nothing new, Ned - just one last present from the Prosecutor. Funny thing though, Lacy didn't mention how this person with the DNA entwined the fibers from Patsy's clothes into the garrotte!

 

[Jeana (DP)]

This is pretty big news. Just got word and not up to speed on touch DNA, anyone care to elaborate?

Because of Lacy's ridiculous fiasco with Karr, I find this hard to believe.

DNA Low Copy Number (DNA LCN), a new technique developed by the FSS that allows a DNA profile to be obtained from a sample containing very few cells.

Low-template DNA is also known as "touch DNA" because investigators can extract samples from just four or five cells deposited by suspects only briefly holding objects such as a gun, a door handle or a glass. The technique was used in the Peter Falconio murder trial in Australia as well as the conviction of the rapist Antoni Imiela, who struck several times in south-east England.

http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/april2008/touch_dna.html

 

[jubie]

Nothing new, Ned - just one last present from the Prosecutor. Funny thing though, Lacy didn't mention how this person with the DNA entwined the fibers from Patsy's clothes into the garrotte!

Oh yeah there's that and John's shirt fibers in her panties too.:waitasec:

 

[Chanler]

Now that the Ramsey's have been declared innocent, I assume this means they can no longer be bashed here anymore. Or is there a different site standard that permits victims (such as the parents) in Jon Benet's case to be bashed versus all other cases where victim bashing is not permitted?

That suggestion sounds reasonable to me. I don't think that a double standard should be rationalized.

 

[Nedthan Johns]

Hi Grainne,

I used to believe a similar theroy and went back and forth for years. It's hard to believe anything that comes out of the Boulder DA's office, that's what makes this news hard to swallow. I don't know enough about touch DNA to make a statement here but find it hard to believe that anything could match the contaiminated blood DNA found in the panties to make a conclusion that excludes the parents. Their refusal to help the investigation even to this day lends me to stay further on the Ramsey side of the fense.

 

[RiverRat]

Handwriting evidence is weak even when they say they've got a match, "can't be excluded" means very little to me.

I think he was a pedophile who followed the child pagents, as part of his fantasy life. I think he may have to some degree known of the family. I think he planned to kidnap her, get some nice ransom money, and have a child to rape for a few days. I think he thought he knew her, just like a deranged stalker of a movie star thinks they know the movie star - not that he did know her. You know the type of thing - "The way she posed at the end of the runway, that was just for me!". I think he wrote the note, went up and got JBR, saw the tools of his trade - or at least something he could easily adapt into them, decided to go for it, and bashed her head when she wasn't responding as in his fantasies, dressed her as his little doll, or maybe not realizing she was all the way dead, not just unconscious at first, and left.


DNA in a dead girl's panties, liquid, in blood - that's insanely strong evidence to me. Only the fairly unlikely possibility that it was from manufacturing made it possible to ignore. But when you add in that exact same DNA being elsewhere on her clothes - that possibility vanishes, and to me, you are left with the clear and unconditional fact that this is the killer.


There are a few options there that include the parents - but that is one of the killers at the very least. Someone could say they knew and allowed it, and wrote the note to cover - but that sounds too improbable to me, without any evidence of it.


Not so long ago, many believed poor Jessica's father or grandfather killed her - it was too improbable that someone snuck into the house, and the grandfather just so happens to have had related problems in the past. If Couey had never been found, they'd still be considered no doubt guilty by some - the coincidence of a dead girl with a questionable family would be too much.

And this one certain pedophile just happens to write his "q's" exactly like Patsy as evidenced below? Does anyone else in this world substitute the number 8 for the letter q?!

 

[trixie]

At least you have a choice! :clap: I have to keep on keeping on, but at least this one doesn't have my blood pressure skyrocketing with a suspect that really isn't a suspect after all.

I RR! Well I know it won't happen on this forum but I want to yell, "Look out Fleet White! They'll be coming after you again now. Say thanks to Mary Lacy for that!"
Actually Fleet and anybody else who was ever investigated in this crime are once again now under suspicion by IDI's. I think they will feel it's ok now to poit the finger at one of them. I guess they'll all pick their favorite suspect and have another go at trying to convict them on the forums. I feel sorry for anyone who ever had anything to do with the Ramseys now. They are really in for it. Mary Lacy has unleashed the IDI's to say what they want about anybody BUT the Ramseys.