The Ramseys are Cleared

[Nedthan Johns]

Jeana,

Thanks for the weblink. I work with a very smart Scientist here and will get some more information on this.

 

[Medea]

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.

If it was semen I would agree with you, but my understanding is it's not.

I think your scenario flies in the face of what the typical pedophile does who does not know his victim, e.g. a family member or a neighbor.

So, to me the choices are thus:

1) Believe the majority of the evidence including the FBI profiles that the killer was a family member and that everything after the head bash was staging and that this DNA is not related to her murder, though it could be related to her sexual abuse as a separate issue.

2) Believe the random DNA is that of the intruder and discount the bulk of the rest of the evidence or believe a neverbefore, not even close, scenario of a pedophile intruder who does not abduct the child, writes a ransom note using insider information and doesn't even rape the victim.

I will take Door Number One.

 

[RiverRat]

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

That was one busy little Intruder! LOL - I hate to laugh, but I have to to keep from crying......the Rich just got Richer. JonBenet never had a chance in life or death.

 

[trixie]

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.

Well now that's it in a nutshell, isn't it? You should make that your siggy.

 

[Wudge]

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

titcr

 

[Nedthan Johns]

During the subsequent investigation FSS forensic scientist Jonathan Whitaker was asked to carry out DNA tests on the hand ties used to restrain Ms Lees. Dr Whitaker used DNA LCN and was able to obtain a DNA profile from deep inside the home made ties

From the link Jeana provided. Okay so we apparently have touch DNA obtained from her long john pants, what about the rope? How can the Ramsey's be excluded from DNA that may or may not link directly with the murder??? The rope does. How does this exclude Patsy Ramsey or even John Ramsey from assisting with this crime?

 

[RiverRat]

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.

That would sooooooo be a dream come true for me if they went after the long ago cleared Whites- but as always, it will just be alluded to on message boards for the Ramseys.....but if Nancy Krebs wants to remind Lacy that John Ramsey is the man that she claims raped her when she was a child while filming and selling the videos of the rapes, who would I be to stop her?!

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Jeana,

Thanks for the weblink. I work with a very smart Scientist here and will get some more information on this.

You're welcome and please post if your co-worker can give us any info!!

 

[Details]

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.

If we're looking at issues of credibility - how long was it they said the house was fully surrounded by snow without footsteps, so there was no possible way there was an intruder? It took a fair bit for the photographs to be looked at to realize there were plenty of gaps in that snow.

JMO, but I've seen far more LE bias against rather than for the Ramseys, up until it finally became clear there simply was no case. They've been trying for years to get anything on them. There was nothing to get.

 

[Details]

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?!

Wouldn't surprise me. I don't think that is such a rare thing. Lots of people have trouble with that letter.

 

[Zelda]

This is ridiculous. It is foreign, male DNA on a legging. What form was the DNA? If it is foreign semen, I would agree else I don't believe it. I guess that Boulder is moving on...

How do they know the semen came from a foreign person? Or is foreign used as not fsmily?

 

[Jeana (DP)]

How do they know the semen came from a foreign person? Or is foreign used as not fsmily?

Not a family member.

 

[Medea]

If we're looking at issues of credibility - how long was it they said the house was fully surrounded by snow without footsteps, so there was no possible way there was an intruder? It took a fair bit for the photographs to be looked at to realize there were plenty of gaps in that snow.

JMO, but I've seen far more LE bias against rather than for the Ramseys, up until it finally became clear there simply was no case. They've been trying for years to get anything on them. There was nothing to get.

For what possible reason would the Boulder PD start out with a bias against the Ramsey family and then try and basically frame them, considering Ramsey's money and influence?

This just rings hollow to me, its what every person accused of killing a family member always says...poor me, the cops were biased and failed to find the 'real' killer.

 

[MrsMush99]

Wouldn't surprise me. I don't think that is such a rare thing. Lots of people have trouble with that letter.

Come to think of it, my q's could look like an 8. And I'm not trying to be funny, I'm being serious.

 

[Seeker]

RiverRat and others - yes, they did check if this could have been an autopsy tech.

Not that they'd have any reason to have their DNA in the panties anyway.

Because Lacy say's so? She wasn't even the DA back then and I know they did not DNA test all the lab assistants!

I sincerely doubt they tested the lab assistant who stole vital documents and sold them to the tabloids either....
Fired him certainly, but tested his DNA? HA!

 

[MrsMush99]

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?

Yes, it is different on this forum. Tricia has said so herself. It's just the way it is.

 

[Kim Ii]

I haven't read through all the posts, but here is what one article on Yahoo! stated re: the new DNA evidence:

..."Early in the investigation, police found male DNA in a drop of blood on JonBenet's underwear and determined it was not from anyone in her family. But Lacy said investigators were unable to say who it came from and whether that person was the killer."

"Then, late last year, prosecutors turned over long underwear JonBenet was wearing to the Bode Technology Group near Washington, which looked for "touch DNA," or cells left behind where someone has touched something."

"The laboratory found previously undiscovered genetic material on the sides of the girl's long underwear, where an attacker would have grasped the clothing to pull it down, authorities said. The DNA matched the genetic material found earlier."

"Lacy said the presence of the same male DNA in three places on the girl's clothing convinced investigators it belonged to JonBenet's killer and had not been left accidentally by an innocent party." (emphasis mine)

"It is therefore the position of the Boulder District Attorney's Office that this profile belongs to the perpetrator of the homicide," she said in a statement. In her letter to the Ramseys, she said the DNA evidence "has vindicated your family."

 

[Nedthan Johns]

Okay here is what I found out. As you all may or may not know having followed this case for years and working in the Biotech industry I have direct access to very bright people who know a lot about DNA. Touch DNA is just a fancy term (one they never heard of and probably dubbed by the media they said) for a small or incomplete DNA marker. Such as a single cell found on clothing, which is what we have here according to Lacy in 3 places , she states: the presence of the same male DNA in three places on the girl's clothing convinced investigators it belonged to JonBenet's killer and had not been left accidentally by an innocent party.

According to several of the Ph.D.'s I spoke with this is significant because the odds of it being in so many places and linked directly to the blood found in her panties, does in fact point to a third party. Again these markers are incomplete hence (my favorite Pasty Ramsey word) the word Touch DNA. It's a small sample, again where they can exclude someone but not link someone directly to the crime. So what are the odds this DNA is similar in 3 places on her longjohns? Probably more significant then finding them on her outer clothing. The consenes was by my group, THIS IS HUGE. Is the statement then accurate or too bold for Lacy to say the parents are vindicated? The group here thinks there was a third party in that house. I'm stunned.

 

[LI_Mom]

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.

ITA.

There are just too many LITTLE 'lies' by the Ramseys... denying any knowledge about the pineapple, the flashlight, the baseball bat, the open window, the Santa Bear, the boots.... the bag with rope upstairs on one of the beds.... the way Patsy stepped OVER the step where the ransom note was laying... John reading the ransom note down on the floor in the hallway (?) ....

it was as if they were fully conscience from the beginning that all these things could 'prove' an intruder if they denied they were connected to their family.


I never really thought the garrote HAD to be made the night of the murder in a rush.... it's VERY easy to believe a young boy could play in the basement & create something like that.... not as a weapon... out of boredom & just for fun.

And left it laying around where it later comes in handy at the scene of a crime.

And nobody was stopped from leaving the house after the police were first called.... it's no problem at all to dispose of any evidence, in that case.

 

[Skigwy]

I followed this case in great detail and posted extensively on it from 1997 to April of 2003. It was at that time that U.S. District Judge Julie E. Carnes, ruled: "there is abundant evidence" to support assertions by JonBenét's parents, John B. and Patricia P. "Patsy" Ramsey, that an intruder entered their home at some point during the night of Dec. 25, 1996, and killed their daughter."

Then you should be aware of Mary Lacy's documented history of utter incompetence and cowing in the face of Lin Wood legal threats.

And, since you mention Carnes, you should also be aware of the source of her "abundant evidence".


The Ramseys have asserted loads...they just won't assert their phone records.