The Ramseys are no longer “cleared” according to Stan Garnett

[WANM]

I don't believe that the Ramsey parents or Burke had anything to do with it, but I have an extremely hard time with a 'random intruder' theory. There is STRONG evidence pointing to the fact that an insider did it, and I agree with all of you on that point. I was thinking about this yesterday- The suitcase found under the window came from the house, because Patsy was packing for a trip on December 26. That means that someone had to gain access to the house, then bring the suitcase back outside. Why would you need to use the suitcase to gain entry into the house if you already gained entry?? Which makes me wonder- Did someone stage it as a "break in" because they didn't want people to think it was someone close enough to the Ramsey family to have access to the house?? Not only that but someone who broke in to the house would be extremely cautious when turning on lights and walking through a dark house, because they wouldn't want to wake anyone up. How would you manage to find Patsy's paintbrush and the notepad and pen, and on top of all that- How could you find Jonbenet's room or the wine cellar? Even highly experienced criminals would NEVER take time and effort to search the house for a notepad and pen and a paintbrush AND (assuming the person had never been in the house before) find Jonbenet's room. AND after all that, (still assuming the person had nothing to do with the Ramseys prior to this time) the intruder had somehow found out Patsy and John's names. That is very personal for your average sex offender. Once again, I don't think Patsy, John, or Burke did it. Not because I favor them, but because the evidence says they did NOT do it. But the evidence does point to someone very close to the Ramseys.

 

[BBB167893]

I don't believe that the Ramsey parents or Burke had anything to do with it, but I have an extremely hard time with a 'random intruder' theory. There is STRONG evidence pointing to the fact that an insider did it, and I agree with all of you on that point. I was thinking about this yesterday- The suitcase found under the window came from the house, because Patsy was packing for a trip on December 26. That means that someone had to gain access to the house, then bring the suitcase back outside. Why would you need to use the suitcase to gain entry into the house if you already gained entry?? Which makes me wonder- Did someone stage it as a "break in" because they didn't want people to think it was someone close enough to the Ramsey family to have access to the house?? Not only that but someone who broke in to the house would be extremely cautious when turning on lights and walking through a dark house, because they wouldn't want to wake anyone up. How would you manage to find Patsy's paintbrush and the notepad and pen, and on top of all that- How could you find Jonbenet's room or the wine cellar? Even highly experienced criminals would NEVER take time and effort to search the house for a notepad and pen and a paintbrush AND (assuming the person had never been in the house before) find Jonbenet's room. AND after all that, (still assuming the person had nothing to do with the Ramseys prior to this time) the intruder had somehow found out Patsy and John's names. That is very personal for your average sex offender. Once again, I don't think Patsy, John, or Burke did it. Not because I favor them, but because the evidence says they did NOT do it. But the evidence does point to someone very close to the Ramseys.

Now that's something I can get my head around.

 

[joeskidbeck]

I don't believe that the Ramsey parents or Burke had anything to do with it, but I have an extremely hard time with a 'random intruder' theory. There is STRONG evidence pointing to the fact that an insider did it, and I agree with all of you on that point. I was thinking about this yesterday- The suitcase found under the window came from the house, because Patsy was packing for a trip on December 26. That means that someone had to gain access to the house, then bring the suitcase back outside. Why would you need to use the suitcase to gain entry into the house if you already gained entry?? Which makes me wonder- Did someone stage it as a "break in" because they didn't want people to think it was someone close enough to the Ramsey family to have access to the house?? Not only that but someone who broke in to the house would be extremely cautious when turning on lights and walking through a dark house, because they wouldn't want to wake anyone up. How would you manage to find Patsy's paintbrush and the notepad and pen, and on top of all that- How could you find Jonbenet's room or the wine cellar? Even highly experienced criminals would NEVER take time and effort to search the house for a notepad and pen and a paintbrush AND (assuming the person had never been in the house before) find Jonbenet's room. AND after all that, (still assuming the person had nothing to do with the Ramseys prior to this time) the intruder had somehow found out Patsy and John's names. That is very personal for your average sex offender. Once again, I don't think Patsy, John, or Burke did it. Not because I favor them, but because the evidence says they did NOT do it. But the evidence does point to someone very close to the Ramseys.

BBM

WANM, the suitcase was inside the cellar, under the window. It has been theorized that it was used by an intruder to leave the house, but I've never heard that the suitcase itself was ever outside the house. This suitcase belonged to JAR and he stored it at the Ramseys while he attended the University. I don't believe that it was one Patsy would have used for their trip.
If you believe the Ramseys were not at all involved in their daughter's death, do you have a theory that would explain all their lies? I have been studying this case for the last 12 years and their behavior will not let me believe they are innocent.
TIA
Becky

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Here's what I don't understand about the DNA: If the DNA is bogus, and it can't clear the Ramseys, then how can it clear anyone else? I don't think he was involved, but JMK was cleared because his DNA didn't match. I don't think anyone should be cleared based solely on the DNA found on JBR.

 

[BBB167893]

Here's what I don't understand about the DNA: If the DNA is bogus, and it can't clear the Ramseys, then how can it clear anyone else?

Good question.

I don't think he was involved, but JMK was cleared because his DNA didn't match.

That's not exactly true, eileen. That's actually a common misconception. If you read what ML had to say at the de-press conference, it was clear that they were prepared to go ahead with the case against him even if the DNA didn't match. What cleared him was not that his DNA matched per se; it was that his own story made it IMPOSSIBLE for his DNA not to match.

I hope I worded that clear enough. I get confused myself!

I don't think anyone should be cleared based solely on the DNA found on JBR.

Agreed! To me, it goes back to the crime lab vs. shoeleather debate.

 

[DeeDee249]

That suitcase was not there because they were packing for their trip. It was identified by JR as belonging to his college-age son, JAR, who attended the University right there in Boulder. JR said it was used by his son to bring laundry and things back and forth to the campus. Inside that suitcase was a comforter (also described as a blanket) from JAR's dorm room and stained with his semen. There was also a children's Dr. Seuss book.

The suitcase was NOT under the window originally. FW admitted putting it there himself when he looked at the broken window. When Lou Smit saw it there, he delightedly claimed it was proof that an intruder had used it to get out. Of course, he made no mention of how it had not fallen over when used as a ladder, or how the intruder got out of that window well without breaking a spider web found intact by police, just a little while after he allegedly climbed out. Spiders are dormant in a Colorado winter. This was an OLD spider web.
He also made no mention of how the intruder pulled a chair against the door (to the room where the suitcase was found) AFTER he had closed the door behind him. In other words, he would have had to pull it through the closed door. When asked about this very thing, JR claimed the intruder was able to do this impossible feat because he was "clever".

 

[cynic]

He also made no mention of how the intruder pulled a chair against the door (to the room where the suitcase was found) AFTER he had closed the door behind him. In other words, he would have had to pull it through the closed door. When asked about this very thing, JR claimed the intruder was able to do this impossible feat because he was "clever".

LOU SMIT: But when you went to the train room, you had move these things in order to get into the train room?
JOHN RAMSEY: Right. I had to move the chair.
LOU SMIT: The thing I'm trying to figure out in my mind then is, if an intruder went through the door, he'd almost have to pull the chair behind him.
JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah. That's correct.
LOU SMIT: Because that would have been his exit?
JOHN RAMSEY: Right.
LOU SMIT: Okay.
JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah. It was blocked. He'd have to move something to get into the room. LOU SMIT: And he would have had to move it back, if he was in there trying to get out, is that correct?
JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah.
LOU SMIT: So that's not very logical as far as –
JOHN RAMSEY: I think it is. I mean if this person is that bizarrely clever to have not left any good evidence, but left all these little funny little clues around, they certain are clever enough to pull the chair back when they left.
LOU SMIT: But it was your impression that that chair was blocking that door?
JOHN RAMSEY: Right. The chair and something else. But it certainly wasn't the Easter baskets. They were sitting there on the drum table. So I never touched them. I just moved the chair and went in.
John Ramsey Interview, 1998

 

[DeeDee249]

Yep- clever.

 

[Justin Credible]

That suitcase was not there because they were packing for their trip. It was identified by JR as belonging to his college-age son, JAR, who attended the University right there in Boulder. JR said it was used by his son to bring laundry and things back and forth to the campus. Inside that suitcase was a comforter (also described as a blanket) from JAR's dorm room and stained with his semen. There was also a children's Dr. Seuss book.

The suitcase was NOT under the window originally. FW admitted putting it there himself when he looked at the broken window. When Lou Smit saw it there, he delightedly claimed it was proof that an intruder had used it to get out. Of course, he made no mention of how it had not fallen over when used as a ladder, or how the intruder got out of that window well without breaking a spider web found intact by police, just a little while after he allegedly climbed out. Spiders are dormant in a Colorado winter. This was an OLD spider web.
He also made no mention of how the intruder pulled a chair against the door (to the room where the suitcase was found) AFTER he had closed the door behind him. In other words, he would have had to pull it through the closed door. When asked about this very thing, JR claimed the intruder was able to do this impossible feat because he was "clever".[/]

You cannot be serious... I'm sorry - that was an old fashioned suitcase and a man cannot stand on top of one of those without it collapsing or falling over, especially when it wasn't completely packed. Now I'm only a lowly Aeronautocal Engineer, but that theory just stinks to high heaven - just what wa Lou Smit thinking???

 

[SunnieRN]

Thing that always got me about this, was why wouldn't an intruder have used the chair that was just sitting there, handy, ready to use with greater ease. Secondly, what wild hair got up in Smit, when he knew the suitcase had been moved there by Fleet White, by his admission? Absurd!

LOU SMIT: But when you went to the train room, you had move these things in order to get into the train room?
JOHN RAMSEY: Right. I had to move the chair.
LOU SMIT: The thing I'm trying to figure out in my mind then is, if an intruder went through the door, he'd almost have to pull the chair behind him.
JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah. That's correct.
LOU SMIT: Because that would have been his exit?
JOHN RAMSEY: Right.
LOU SMIT: Okay.
JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah. It was blocked. He'd have to move something to get into the room. LOU SMIT: And he would have had to move it back, if he was in there trying to get out, is that correct?
JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah.
LOU SMIT: So that's not very logical as far as –
JOHN RAMSEY: I think it is. I mean if this person is that bizarrely clever to have not left any good evidence, but left all these little funny little clues around, they certain are clever enough to pull the chair back when they left.
LOU SMIT: But it was your impression that that chair was blocking that door?
JOHN RAMSEY: Right. The chair and something else. But it certainly wasn't the Easter baskets. They were sitting there on the drum table. So I never touched them. I just moved the chair and went in.
John Ramsey Interview, 1998

 

[DeeDee249]

That suitcase was not there because they were packing for their trip. It was identified by JR as belonging to his college-age son, JAR, who attended the University right there in Boulder. JR said it was used by his son to bring laundry and things back and forth to the campus. Inside that suitcase was a comforter (also described as a blanket) from JAR's dorm room and stained with his semen. There was also a children's Dr. Seuss book.

The suitcase was NOT under the window originally. FW admitted putting it there himself when he looked at the broken window. When Lou Smit saw it there, he delightedly claimed it was proof that an intruder had used it to get out. Of course, he made no mention of how it had not fallen over when used as a ladder, or how the intruder got out of that window well without breaking a spider web found intact by police, just a little while after he allegedly climbed out. Spiders are dormant in a Colorado winter. This was an OLD spider web.
He also made no mention of how the intruder pulled a chair against the door (to the room where the suitcase was found) AFTER he had closed the door behind him. In other words, he would have had to pull it through the closed door. When asked about this very thing, JR claimed the intruder was able to do this impossible feat because he was "clever".[/]

You cannot be serious... I'm sorry - that was an old fashioned suitcase and a man cannot stand on top of one of those without it collapsing or falling over, especially when it wasn't completely packed. Now I'm only a lowly Aeronautocal Engineer, but that theory just stinks to high heaven - just what wa Lou Smit thinking???

I'll tell you what he was thinking- he was thinking of saying anything he could to create smoke and mirrors around the Rs and the holes in their stories. Create a fog, a mist, anything- even something that logically isn't possible- to deflect suspicion from these fellow devout Christians.
NO detective hired by a police department should have EVER sat and prayed with suspects. He should have been fired for that.

 

[SunnieRN]

I'll tell you what he was thinking- he was thinking of saying anything he could to create smoke and mirrors around the Rs and the holes in their stories. Create a fog, a mist, anything- even something that logically isn't possible- to deflect suspicion from these fellow devout Christians.
NO detective hired by a police department should have EVER sat and prayed with suspects. He should have been fired for that.

Among other things!

 

[Ames]

BBM

WANM, the suitcase was inside the cellar, under the window. It has been theorized that it was used by an intruder to leave the house, but I've never heard that the suitcase itself was ever outside the house. This suitcase belonged to JAR and he stored it at the Ramseys while he attended the University. I don't believe that it was one Patsy would have used for their trip.
If you believe the Ramseys were not at all involved in their daughter's death, do you have a theory that would explain all their lies? I have been studying this case for the last 12 years and their behavior will not let me believe they are innocent.
TIA
Becky

And it was under the window...because FLEET put it there...he admitted moving it, while looking for glass. The Ramsey's just saw this opportunity ...yet again...to blame an intruder (that used the suitcase as a stepping stone, out of the basement window.....nevermind that it wasn't actually there to begin with.)

 

[Ames]

Thing that always got me about this, was why wouldn't an intruder have used the chair that was just sitting there, handy, ready to use with greater ease. Secondly, what wild hair got up in Smit, when he knew the suitcase had been moved there by Fleet White, by his admission? Absurd!

John is so full of BS. The chair was there, because someone that lived inside the home, PUT it there. No intruder pulled that chair with him, as he closed the door, and made his escape...how ludicrous is THAT?? That doesn't even make sense....and is impossible to do. Why the h*ll would an intruder do that anyway....what would be the purpose?? That's just insane...

 

[Ames]

Yep- clever.

Not only clever...but also a magician.

 

[Peepers]

I'll tell you what he was thinking- he was thinking of saying anything he could to create smoke and mirrors around the Rs and the holes in their stories. Create a fog, a mist, anything- even something that logically isn't possible- to deflect suspicion from these fellow devout Christians.
NO detective hired by a police department should have EVER sat and prayed with suspects. He should have been fired for that.

I agree with you on that DeeDee, the praying with the R's was unbelievable to me also. But do you think LS was purposely creating doubt to defend them, knowing it didnt make sense, or do you think he was sucked in by their religious "connection" and just refused to believe they could have done it. Either way it was unethical to say the least but I could see how the R's could be very sympathetic characters.

 

[Toltec]

I can picture this intruder entering Patsy's bathroom while she and John slept...and plucked fibers from her sweater!

 

[DeeDee249]

I agree with you on that DeeDee, the praying with the R's was unbelievable to me also. But do you think LS was purposely creating doubt to defend them, knowing it didnt make sense, or do you think he was sucked in by their religious "connection" and just refused to believe they could have done it. Either way it was unethical to say the least but I could see how the R's could be very sympathetic characters.

I think he was sucked in. I think he didn't WANT to believe that such devout Christians could have done this. Sadly, some on the GJ believed the same thing.

 

[BBB167893]

I'll tell you what he was thinking- he was thinking of saying anything he could to create smoke and mirrors around the Rs and the holes in their stories. Create a fog, a mist, anything- even something that logically isn't possible- to deflect suspicion from these fellow devout Christians.
NO detective hired by a police department should have EVER sat and prayed with suspects. He should have been fired for that.

Most other places, he would have been.

 

[SunnieRN]

I'll tell you what he was thinking- he was thinking of saying anything he could to create smoke and mirrors around the Rs and the holes in their stories. Create a fog, a mist, anything- even something that logically isn't possible- to deflect suspicion from these fellow devout Christians.
NO detective hired by a police department should have EVER sat and prayed with suspects. He should have been fired for that.

Unfortunately and with disastrous results, it worked. No one has paid a price and been punished for JonBenets death.

I can picture this intruder entering Patsy's bathroom while she and John slept...and plucked fibers from her sweater!

:floorlaugh: loved the mental picture this brought forth, but don't forget the fibers from Johns Israeli sweater also!