The Ramseys are Cleared

[Adalena935]

I didn't follow this case closely. I didn't have time. I saw it going south with the initial DA and it went cold. I saw some tv documentaries about it which showed both sides pro & con re; the parents v. intruder theories. I find this new evidence very telling though. If nothing else this case should tell LE agencies nationwide that playing gotcha with pre-ordained suspects is the wrong path.

 

[BBB167893]

I would agree, if that were the case here. IMO, it wasn't and isn't.

There's no reason to cast a wider net. There IS a reason (a few, really) not to clear them yet. And you got that from a guy who has been on this one from the beginning.

 

[angelwngs]

I happen to think that the mother sitting in a chair is evidence that she knows exactly where her daughter's body is, and doesn't want to be the one to find her.

...also she is sitting there in a chair and has sent her only other child off to a friend's home, while 'there is an intruder/kidnapper snatching up babies in Boulder, more specifically, her only baby girl.'

 

[SeekingJana]

...also she is sitting there in a chair and has sent her only other child off to a friend's home, while 'there is an intruder/kidnapper snatching up babies in Boulder, more specifically, her only baby girl.'

Yep. She sat directly above the dank, musty, dirty basement room where JonBenet's body lay. Directly above " that child". And puked on the rug at some point. I wonder if she thought she smelled decomp.:furious:
IMO.

Maria

 

[philamena]

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.

The killer should suffer for all eternity. :furious:

 

[Adalena935]

I want to see where the DNA from the panties matches the DNA on the long johns. Then I'd like to see the coroner provide DNA samples to be sure that it wasn't left by him as he undressed the body and handled the clothing.
And yes, let's apply the "touch DNA test" to the cord, tape, spoon, flashlight.

There are still a few things that should give us pause now...IMHO, PR wrote the ransom note- I've seen those exemplars. She wrote that note.
And the pineapple. Either they lied about the pineapple or they are covering for someone. For JBR to have sat and eaten the pineapple with someone- it was someone she knew. If she had snacked with her brother and the parents were unaware of it, then why wouldn't her brother say so? He is over 21 now. Old enough to know that the pineapple in his sister's stomach and the fact that his parents denied feeding it to her was a major issue in this case. However he was at age 9-10, Asbergers's or just an immanture kid, he went to college and should have the sense to speak up about it now.

Also, Lacy has "exonerated" the IMMEDIATE family. The three Rs that were in the house that night. But what about some family members that COULD have been there and have denied it? JAR? Grandpa?

And one last thing- this is Lacy- a Hunter legacy. They've been on the R side for 12 years. They threw enough roadblocks in front of this investigation from day 1 to have been charged with obstruction of justice themselves.
Remember the Karr fiasco and Lacy at that press conference?
Let's take this all with a grain of salt until that DNA actually matches a PERSON.
I think it's very telling that the ONE thing that could go a long way to solve the case: testing the garrote itself- hasn't been done.

All 3 samples of DNA on 2 different garments the dead child was dressed in after death is owned by one human male. He's just not in the database yet. Maybe he's never been arrested. Maybe he's been arrested, but no DNA sample taken from him. Yet. Don't worry they'll ID him one day. Count on it.

 

[Adalena935]

I happen to think that the mother sitting in a chair is evidence that she knows exactly where her daughter's body is, and doesn't want to be the one to find her.

That's fine.

 

[BBB167893]

All 3 samples of DNA on 2 different garments the dead child was dressed in after death is owned by one human male. He's just not in the database yet. Maybe he's never been arrested. Maybe he's been arrested, but no DNA sample taken from him. Yet. Don't worry they'll ID him one day. Count on it.

At least then it would be over!

 

[philamena]

Do you have a copy you want to lend me? I'll read it. But, I read PMPT also, and read over at the A Candy Rose site and nothing has swayed me to say they have done it.

I wrote all in it, lol, but you are more than welcome to it.

 

[DeeDee249]

What the IDIs here have to understand is that we RDIs have never taken pleasure or satisfaction in the thought that JBR was killed by her parent(s). More than anything, we would hope that was not true. But in a case that was so mismanaged from the beginning, and with parental behavior so suspicious (the pineapple, the handwriting on the NOTE, the refusal to cooperate with LE)
and with the determination of the DA's office from the start to thwart the investigation, we have had no other credible suspects.
And while the new evidence needs further investigation, it is by no means the end to this puzzle.

 

[genecam]

. . . If nothing else this case should tell LE agencies nationwide that playing gotcha with pre-ordained suspects is the wrong path.

By far, this is not the only case on this board where this applies. Reminds me of the refrain from the old Peter, Paul and Mary song Where Have All The Flowers Gone:

"When will they eeevvverr learn?"

 

[BBB167893]

What the IDIs here have to understand is that we RDIs have never taken pleasure or satisfaction in the thought that JBR was killed by her parent(s). More than anything, we would hope that was not true. But in a case that was so mismanaged from the beginning, and with parental behavior so suspicious (the pineapple, the handwriting on the NOTE, the refusal to cooperate with LE)
and with the determination of the DA's office from the start to thwart the investigation, we have had no other credible suspects.
And while the new evidence needs further investigation, it is by no means the end to this puzzle.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[txsvicki]

I have some questions about this new dna method. I wonder if John is responsible for getting it done and had to pay for this new testing. Also, does this type testing show the same final results as semen or blood dna testing? It will be interesting to see if LE in Colorado and other states start testing clothing and other items in any unsolved child murder cases. There may even be a few innocent people sitting in prison for crimes they didn't commit.

 

[ConfusedPopsicle]

Could someone please explain to me the fiber evidence everyone is talking about? I've seen it said many times that Patsy's/Johns clothing fibers were found in the garrote/whatever. How can it be said that it was theirs for sure? Everything I've ever learned about fiber evidence is just that it ISN'T evidence. Only that it can be said that fibers found were SIMILAR to whatever being compared to, that you can't say for absolute certainty that the fibers came from something. I thought it was like that with hair as well. Am I wrong? Lol if I am boy have I been misled.:waitasec:

 

[BBB167893]

Could someone please explain to me the fiber evidence everyone is talking about? I've seen it said many times that Patsy's/Johns clothing fibers were found in the garrote/whatever. How can it be said that it was theirs for sure? Everything I've ever learned about fiber evidence is just that it ISN'T evidence. Only that it can be said that fibers found were SIMILAR to whatever being compared to, that you can't say for absolute certainty that the fibers came from something. I thought it was like that with hair as well. Am I wrong? Lol if I am boy have I been misled.:waitasec:

Okay, here goes. Fiber evidence IS evidence, but you're part right. It can only be described as "consistent" to what it is compared to, BUT what goes into that determination is microscopic analysis (such as what kind of fibers, blends, etc) and chemical analysis and spectral analysis. Using that, you can then trace it to the manufacturer. It's like, "oh, this coat, shirt, pair of pants, whatever comes from yadda-yadda, and only Bloomingdales, Neiman Marcus sells it, it was made in such-and-such country, and on and on. That's what narrows it down.

In short: consistent=you're screwed.

Not only that, but in 2002, Patsy SAID they were her fibers.

 

[ConfusedPopsicle]

Okay, here goes. Fiber evidence IS evidence, but you're part right. It can only be described as "consistent" to what it is compared to, BUT what goes into that determination is microscopic analysis (such as what kind of fibers, blends, etc) and chemical analysis and spectral analysis. Using that, you can then trace it to the manufacturer. It's like, "oh, this coat, shirt, pair of pants, whatever comes from yadda-yadda, and only Bloomingdales, Neiman Marcus sells it, it was made in such-and-such country, and on and on. That's what narrows it down.

In short: consistent=you're screwed.

Not only that, but in 2002, Patsy SAID they were her fibers.

Ah, thank you so much. I was worried that I was being a little demanding for a noob lol. I was confused, but you cleared it up for me. Thanks again

 

[LinasK]

I agree Tex. The Ramseys have now officially joined other parents that were falsely accused in the disappearance of their child, such as the Van Dam's, the Aisenbergs, the Smarts, etc..

Wrong Wudge- the Ramsey's aren't falsely accused,and the Smarts never were accused and neither were the Van Dams- it was their lifestyle that was on trial- they were so busy partying they didn't check on her to notice she was missing.

 

[Victor]

Why hasn't this touch DNA been found on the tape, the garotte and other obvious places?

Yes, it seems obvious that DNA would be all over the tape and the garotte. Now if the 'new' DNA from her panties & long-johns matched the DNA on the tape and rope, then THAT would pretty conclusively show the killer was not one of the Ramseys.

Why don't they test them to find out?? It's the only logical thing to do!

 

[LinasK]

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?

Ummm, they have NOT been declared innocent, just that the DNA cannot be tied to them, they have not been exonerated, this is old news...

 

[LinasK]

Very true. BTK took one victim to his church and re dressed her in bondage clothing and took pics.

No way a Stage four cancer survivor kills her own child. Cances gives you instant clarity on what's important. Bed wetting and that nonsense....please.

She wasn't at stage 4 when JB was killed, she was a diva pageant mother with low tolerance for uncooperativeness. The bedwetting was caused by the sexual abuse.