The Ramseys are Cleared

[angelwngs]

But is there evidence that Patsy used that???

Unfortunately, there is no evidence that she didn't use that...

(Unfortunately, we don't know what evidence there is or is not in too DAM# many instances in this case!!!!!!!!!!!!! (I'm sorry, I am Not angry at you dear, sweet Mrs Mush...I'm upset at 'Bolder Service Individuals'... Serving the People of Boulder... Yeah... Right...)

Reguardless, I often take dryclean only items and throw them into the dryer for a few seconds with whatever is already in tthe dryer at the time and add a Bounce Dryer sheet if I have one handy, just before my husband, my sons or I put the item on just to freshen it up...
I just thought PR or JR or housekeeper might have also used this quick trick to freshen or release wrinkles in John's sweater.

 

[angelwngs]

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!

Well, Wudge, you know how those pesky rabbits Love to reproduce! :crazy:

 

[angelwngs]

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! ~snip~

I have often put the tip of the brush into my own mouth...and I have seen others do it as well. In fact, I think there are even a few famous paintings and photograhs of artists painting who are doing it... I will have to google image that one for my own confirmation.

 

[Wudge]

I have often put the tip of the brush into my own mouth...and I have seen others do it as well. In fact, I think there are even a few famous paintings and photograhs of artists painting who are doing it... I will have to google image that one for my own confirmation.

For an oil painter, that is a very bad (and perhaps deadly) habit. Many colors of oil paints use heavy minerals or worse, as do some of the best mediums.

 

[JMO8778]

I realize that and addressed it above

Not that my example exonerates John Ramsey but it *is* possible.

..not only was the underwear new and right out of the package(btw,what intruder would redress a child,and care if it was new underwear or not??),but JB had also been wiped down with a cloth.
JB wasn't rolling around on the floor or anything else...his fibers got there bc HE was the one who wiped her down.

(are ppl being paid to defend the R's or something??)

 

[Wudge]

..not only was the underwear new and right out of the package(btw,what intruder would redress a child,and care if it was new underwear or not??),but JB had also been wiped down with a cloth.
JB wasn't rolling around on the floor or anything else...his fibers got there bc HE was the one who wiped her down.

(are ppl being paid to defend the R's or something??)

Nancy Grace has the DNA exonerating the Ramseys. Do you think she was paid to say that?

 

[TexMex]

The ones they picked and paid for while refusing the FBI's, of course.

Morning RR


Yep, the ones pretty much confirmed reliable now with the DNA evidence.
Gelb is no slouch.

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/0525rams1.shtml

Edward Gelb, a respected California-based polygrapher, said he administered two tests to John Ramsey and three to Patsy Ramsey earlier this month. Both were asked whether they killed JonBenet or knew the killer. Patsy Ramsey also was asked whether she wrote the ransom note found in their home.

"What are the chances that two separate individuals would take a series of five polygraph examinations and pass them all — and yet be lying?" Gelb said. "You're going to find it's somewhere between four in 1,000 and one in a trillion."

The Ramseys paid for the tests.

Gelb's findings were reviewed and confirmed by Cleve Baxter, founder of the Central Intelligence Agency's polygraph unit and creator of polygraph scoring techniques considered industry standards.

The Ramseys were given what are known as single-issue examinations, where all questions in a test are designed to mean the same thing, Gelb said. Each test took two to three hours. The results cannot be skewed by drugs, so no screening was done, Gelb said.

The tests are 97-98 percent accurate, said Robert Lee, director of operations for Axciton Systems, which makes the computerized polygraph instrument used by Gelb.

The first test asked the following: Did you inflict any of the injuries that caused the death of JonBenet? Regarding JonBenet, did you inflict any of the injuries that caused her death? Were those injuries that resulted in JonBenet's death inflicted by you?

In the second test, Gelb asked: Do you know for sure who killed JonBenet? Regarding JonBenet, do you know for sure who killed her? Are you concealing the identity of the person who killed JonBenet?

Patsy Ramsey was given an additional test about the ransom note: Did you write the ransom note that was found in your house? Regarding the ransom note, did you write it? Is that your handwriting on the ransom note found in your house?

"Final conclusion: Based on extensive polygraph examination, neither John nor Patsy Ramsey were attempting deception when they gave the indicated answers to the relevant questions," Gelb said.

Baxter said his review confirmed Gelb's conclusion. "I could not fool the polygraph examination myself if a serious issue were involved. And I've been in the field a long time," he said.

Gelb bristled at the suggestion that the questions weren't tough enough.

"These questions are soft? What would you ask?" Gelb said, adding that the single-issue tests have the greatest validity of any polygraph. The questions are designed to force the subject to focus on the topics that pose the greatest threat to them, he said.

The exams were nerve-wracking because so much was at stake, Patsy Ramsey said.

"I had JonBenet's face in my mind from the moment I went into that room," she said. "And I just kept saying, 'This is for you, honey. Because we're going to find out who did this.

"And whatever I have to do, I will do."'

 

[angelwngs]

For an oil painter, that is a very bad (and perhaps deadly) habit. Many colors of oil paints use heavy minerals or worse, as do some of the best mediums.

Thank you for your concern, Wudge, but as a kid I use to eat dirt.
My motto is what doesn't kill me makes me stronger and I have really good Life Insurance, anyway! When I go my son's will think they have won the lottery. :crazy:

 

[Pepper]

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.

This is the main reason why I've never believed the Ramseys were guilty. Neither of them fit the profile. Also when a mother kills, she usually wants to do away with ALL the kids, not just one. Think Susan Smith, Andrea Yates, Diane Downes, just to name a few.

 

[ember]

I'm glad they are cleared.
I have never thought that the Ramsey's did it.
Always seemed like a witch hunt to me.

Hopefully, someday, they will find who did it and JonBenet will finally be able to rest in peace.

 

[islanders]

I'm pleased the new DNA testing has provided more conclusive evidence in this case. It has exonerated Ramsey family.

When the DNA exonerated Mark Car most of the people here accusing the Ramsey's cheered with the results. Now that the DNA exonerates the Ramsey's they are saying it's a consperecy.

It's now clear from the DNA evidence that an intruder killed their daughter and left the crazy letter.

This is also the official position of the authorities who at first accused the family.

 

[Medea]

I guess this means we are entering the phase when unidentified skin cells on a murder victim's body trumps any and all other evidence in a case.

The victim has unidentified DNA under the fingernails. Not guilty.

Unidentified skin cells on their clothes. Not guilty.

Unidentified DNA found in the house. Not guilty.

 

[RiverRat]

http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2008/jul/09/experts-lacys-letter-ramsey-could-have-lasting-imp/

"But experts also said the letter — and subsequent exoneration — wouldn’t prevent prosecutors from ever trying a member of the Ramsey family. If there was enough evidence to support bringing murder charges against them, Lacy’s letter alone wouldn’t be enough to raise reasonable doubt.

“Public announcements don’t control the outcomes of a trial,” said Trip DeMuth, a former Boulder prosecutor who worked on the Ramsey case. “I am not in the camp that believes that a public announcement of innocence makes it impossible to change your mind later.”

The timing of the letter in relation to the waning of Lacy’s term as DA also raised questions Wednesday.

The prosecutor’s term ends Jan. 1, and the case, which was taken over by the district attorney’s office in 2002, likely won’t be wrapped by then. Lacy won’t officially be involved after that date, so any positive or negative consequences from the letter would be out of her hands."

 

[Moab]

I'm pleased the new DNA testing has provided more conclusive evidence in this case. It has exonerated Ramsey family.

When the DNA exonerated Mark Car most of the people here accusing the Ramsey's cheered with the results. Now that the DNA exonerates the Ramsey's they are saying it's a consperecy.

It's now clear from the DNA evidence that an intruder killed their daughter and left the crazy letter.

This is also the official position of the authorities who at first accused the family.

You must not know much about this case to say this. You must look at the source and in this case the source is Mary Lacy who has trouble differentiating between winding her butt and scratching her watch!

 

[Wudge]

You must not know much about this case to say this. You must look at the source and in this case the source is Mary Lacy who has trouble differentiating between winding her butt and scratching her watch!

The Boulder Police Department's position is?

 

[thesleuther]

I'm going to state first of all that I have never believed that the Ramsey family had anything to do with their daughter's death.

As to the announcement clearing their name, it is because of this:

From the beginning, this unidentified DNA in JonBenet's panties has been known. At the time, prosecutors felt that it didn't clear the Ramseys as it could have been left there from the time of manufacture. (Although as a point of interest, it is the very same dna that cleared that psycho they picked up in Thailand - John Mark Kerr).

What this new evidence does is confirm that the unidentified DNA is that of the killer. It is because of a new test available called touch dna. In essence, testing is now sophisticated enough to gather microscopic skin cells left by touching. These skin cells were on her long pyjama bottoms in an area where the killer would have held on to them to pull them down.

So, with matching dna being found on her pyjama bottoms and her underpants, they couldn't have been left at the point of manufacture because they were done at two different times and in two different places. It's conclusive.

Again, I will state that I have never thought they were guilty of hurting their child, and I am so pleased that the evidence finally shows it. I pray that the day will come when the killer will be brought to justice for this absolutely awful heinous unimaginable crime.

 

[Moab]

The Boulder Police Department's position is?

Ambivalence? They haven't had the case for years.

 

[islanders]

Mark Car claimed responsibility and the DNA exonerated him.

The evidence in the case excludes the family as the killers.

Have some of you even considered the possibility that you are accusing an innocent family that was the victim of the murder of their daughter?

It's becoming apparent that you have no consideration for the victims of these kinds of crimes.

 

[Medea]

If this was a sex crime committed by an intruder why didn't he rape the child?

While there WAS evidence of long term sexual abuse found, and the child was assaulted w/the paint brush, leaving a tiny amount of blood, she was not raped by a man?

Why not? This fact seems to me to blow the idea of a sexually based offender out of the water entirely.

 

[Medea]

Mark Car claimed responsibility and the DNA exonerated him.

The evidence in the case excludes the family as the killers.

Have some of you even considered the possibility that you are accusing an innocent family that was the victim of the murder of their daughter?

It's becoming apparent that you have no consideration for the victims of these kinds of crimes.

I disagree, Karr was exonerated because he was NOT IN BOULDER on the night of the crime, not even in the state of Colorado.