The "war",what was it all about

[Chrishope]

The tape with the ""Hon, we need a (or 'em)..." is genuine. But don't even try to listen to it at Youtube -- the sound quality will not be good. Download the original digital recording that is readily available.

I think hearing the additional voices is like separating the sound of different instruments in a symphony. At first you hear the melody as a harmonious single sound. But once you've heard some subtle sound of say a flute within the song, you will always be able to pick it out afterwards because you know exactly what it sounds like and what to listen for.

I still haven't heard JR's voice, but I can definitely make out the sound of a child saying, "What did you..." before the recording is cut off.

Interpret what you hear to mean what you want. It can certainly be taken to mean different things.

I still believe (and I'll keep repeating it) that all four members of the Ramsey family were down in the basement during the 911-call. The call was made from the phone on the table down in the basement.

She couldn't look to the bottom of the RN at that time because according to her and JR, he was squatted down on the floor in his skivvies (not a very pretty visual there, eh) reading the note spread out on the floor. PR had to have remembered the "Victory, SBTC".
.

Good point, she either remembered SBTC or they were lying about JR being on the floor reading it.

The could have been down in the basement, using that phone. Unfortunately we just don't know.

 

[Chrishope]

Chrishope,
You keep changing your story to suit whatever is placed in front of you. One minute its , I don't think we can determine whether the transfer is primary or secondary, from the known (publicly available) fiber evidence. and of course what you really mean is I not the first person plural.

You are asserting that you cannot know, you cannot speak for other members!


What do you think, you reckon they suggested they wafted in on a gush of Colorado air?

Yet LW adopted your position and attempted to rubbish the report, requesting the results and data of all the scientific tests, otherwise they could never be entered at the discovery phase.

You do yourself no favours by only addressing the forensic evidence that is favourable to your theory. This is why you assert nobody can obtain knowledge regarding how the fibers arrived in the wine-cellar. Otherwise your theory is toast!

Another aspect I would cite is Locard's exchange principle:


Since we all know why you cannot determine if the fibers arrived in the wine-cellar because both parents colluded in the staging.

So we can call it a day on this subject and accept you consider the matter inconclusive.


.

Nobody can know if the fibers are there from primary or secondary transfer. If you can know it - and by that I mean prove it - then please do.

The didn't have to waft in on the air, JBR was their child. It's hardly surprising to find PR's fibers on JBR.

Of course LW asked for the data, why wouldn't he? I'm not rubbishing the report, I simply asked if the report tells us that the fibers are there due to primary transfer. I suspect not, but I don't know.

I'm not addressing only the forensic evidence favorable to my theory. I don't know how you get such ideas.

I don't assert that nobody can tell if the fibers are there from primary or secondary transfer because it would "toast" my theory. I assert that nobody can tell if the red jacket fibers are there due to primary or secondary transfer, because I don't see anything in the publicly available evidence that would allow anyone to make such a determination. Primary and secondary are both possible.

Again, and I've asked several times, if you know how to prove that the fibers are there from primary transfer, please share your expertise with the rest of us. If it's definitely primary transfer I will be happy to drop the docG theory of the case. All I ask is your proof.

Locard also allows for secondary transfer.

We don't know that both parents colluded.

But yes, the red jacket fiber evidence is inconclusive.

 

[DeeDee249]

Nobody can know if the fibers are there from primary or secondary transfer. If you can know it - and by that I mean prove it - then please do.

The didn't have to waft in on the air, JBR was their child. It's hardly surprising to find PR's fibers on JBR.

Of course LW asked for the data, why wouldn't he? I'm not rubbishing the report, I simply asked if the report tells us that the fibers are there due to primary transfer. I suspect not, but I don't know.

I'm not addressing only the forensic evidence favorable to my theory. I don't know how you get such ideas.

I don't assert that nobody can tell if the fibers are there from primary or secondary transfer because it would "toast" my theory. I assert that nobody can tell if the red jacket fibers are there due to primary or secondary transfer, because I don't see anything in the publicly available evidence that would allow anyone to make such a determination. Primary and secondary are both possible.

Again, and I've asked several times, if you know how to prove that the fibers are there from primary transfer, please share your expertise with the rest of us. If it's definitely primary transfer I will be happy to drop the docG theory of the case. All I ask is your proof.

Locard also allows for secondary transfer.

We don't know that both parents colluded.

But yes, the red jacket fiber evidence is inconclusive.

I have heard that "she was their child..." stuff long before- we all have. These fibers were found on items specific to this crime. The duct tape, cork KNOT, paint tote, NEW panties. Especially with the tape and cord, which IDI always claim did not come from the house, I can see NO explanation for the parent's fibers being on these items except of they themselves put them on her. Patsy told police she never painted wearing that jacket and never wore it in the basement. The duct tape was left in the basement and not brought up with the body- and the JB was covered with an afghan when Patsy threw herself on her body.

 

[SyraKelly]

I find it very interesting they both distance themselves from John Douglas book-Mind Hunter-but it was found in their bedroom on John's side.
I think the intruder got in their bed and while reading chapter one got the RN idea-went & wrote it-but left his book behind-LOL!!

Why lie about something like this???

 

[Chrishope]

I have heard that "she was their child..." stuff long before- we all have.

Yet you continue to discount it.

These fibers were found on items specific to this crime.

Well of course, that's where they looked. Anything found would have been in items specific to this crime. But what if they had looked in the kitchen? Would they have found PR's fibers there as well? In numbers greater or lesser than in the basement? We will never know.

The duct tape, cork KNOT, paint tote, NEW panties. Especially with the tape and cord, which IDI always claim did not come from the house, I can see NO explanation for the parent's fibers being on these items except of they themselves put them on her.

Well then you aren't trying very hard because secondary transfer explains it very easily. If you want to toss secondary transfer then I think you have the burden of proving it couldn't have happened that way. (My position is that it could be either, and we have no way of knowing which)

Patsy told police she never painted wearing that jacket and never wore it in the basement.

Unfortunately that doesn't rule out secondary transfer.

The duct tape was left in the basement and not brought up with the body-

And do we know how the tape fell when JR ripped it off? Do we know it didn't land on the floor picking up fibers?

and the JB was covered with an afghan when Patsy threw herself on her body.

I don't need to resort to last minute contamination. The fibers could easily be there from secondary transfer.

http://dofs.gbi.georgia.gov/sites/dofs.gbi.georgia.gov/files/imported/vgn/images/portal/cit_1210/57/14/180852003GBI-TraceEvidence.pdf

" ... Remember that fiber matches between two individuals who share the same environment (e.g. live together or drive the same car) are essentially meaningless"

 

[redheadedgal]

These fibers were found on items specific to this crime. The duct tape, cork KNOT, paint tote, NEW panties. ... I can see NO explanation for the parent's fibers being on these items except of they themselves put them on her. Patsy told police she never painted wearing that jacket and never wore it in the basement. The duct tape was left in the basement and not brought up with the body- and the JB was covered with an afghan when Patsy threw herself on her body.

yes-- ita. too many locations of transfer to not be primary. and, it sounds like the FBI would agree:

Fiber Number (----> four red fibers on the duct tape)

The number of fibers on the clothing of a victim identified as matching the clothing of a suspect is important in determining actual contact. The greater the number of fibers, the more likely that contact actually occurred between these individuals.


Fiber Location (----> red fibers on duct tape, in two knots in cord, in paint tray)

Where fibers are found also affects the value placed on a particular fiber association. The location of fibers on different areas of the body or on specific items at the crime scene influences the significance of the fiber association.


http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/july2000/deedric3.htm

 

[UKGuy]

yes-- ita. too many locations of transfer to not be primary. and, it sounds like the FBI would agree:

Fiber Number (----> four red fibers on the duct tape)

The number of fibers on the clothing of a victim identified as matching the clothing of a suspect is important in determining actual contact. The greater the number of fibers, the more likely that contact actually occurred between these individuals.


Fiber Location (----> red fibers on duct tape, in two knots in cord, in paint tray)

Where fibers are found also affects the value placed on a particular fiber association. The location of fibers on different areas of the body or on specific items at the crime scene influences the significance of the fiber association.


http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/july2000/deedric3.htm

redheadedgal,
Excellent analysis!


.

 

[Tricia]

Everyone please stay on topic. Issues between posters on the forum need to be discussed elsewhere please.

Thank you,
Tricia






```````````````````````````````````

 

[Chrishope]

yes-- ita. too many locations of transfer to not be primary. and, it sounds like the FBI would agree:

Fiber Number (----> four red fibers on the duct tape)

The number of fibers on the clothing of a victim identified as matching the clothing of a suspect is important in determining actual contact. The greater the number of fibers, the more likely that contact actually occurred between these individuals.

Fiber Location (----> red fibers on duct tape, in two knots in cord, in paint tray)

Why would four locations be too many for secondary transfer? Show me something that says secondary transfer can only occur in fewer than 4 locations. Note also that all the locations are within a step or two of the body, or touching the body. The tote was a step or two away, and the killer put his hands in the tote to get a paintbrush. The ligature is on the body. The tape is on the body. The blanket was wrapped around the body. It's hard to see why this makes secondary transfer unlikely.

It is true that a greater number of fibers = more likely primary contact. So do we have a greater number of fibers? Greater than what? Greater than where? How many fibers are we dealing with altogether? There's only 4 on the tape, that's not many. How many in the ligature? How many in the tote?

Where fibers are found also affects the value placed on a particular fiber association. The location of fibers on different areas of the body or on specific items at the crime scene influences the significance of the fiber association.


http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/july2000/deedric3.htm

[/quote]

Sure, as a general statement, that's true. And if we were looking for fibers from someone who was not supposed to be in the house, that would be quite significant. Unfortunately, we are looking at fibers that belonged to the people who lived in the house and had regular legitimate contact with the victim.

To quote the Georgia Bureau of Investigation -

"NOTE: The more matching fiber types that exist in a case, the stronger the evidence of association. Remember that fiber matches between two individuals who share the same environment (e.g. live together or drive the same car) are essentially meaningless."

http://dofs.gbi.georgia.gov/sites/d...cit_1210/57/14/180852003GBI-TraceEvidence.pdf

And just so no one misunderstands, my position is not that the fibers are there from secondary transfer, only that they could be. We have two methods of transfer, direct (primary) and indirect (secondary) and the fibers could be there from either method. If we want to rule one method out, then we need to show why the fibers could not have transferred via that method.

Four locations, all on, or within an arm's length of the body doesn't show that it could not be from secondary transfer.

 

[redheadedgal]

lol-- believe what you want...


smh

 

[Chrishope]

lol-- believe what you want...


smh

I'll be happy to believe it was primary transfer if you can just show why it couldn't be secondary. Shouldn't be hard to do if the evidence is actually compelling.

 

[UKGuy]

I'll be happy to believe it was primary transfer if you can just show why it couldn't be secondary. Shouldn't be hard to do if the evidence is actually compelling.

Chrishope,
Maybe you had too much coffee today, but as has been pointed out to you before, the logic is not exclusive, it can be inclusive.

That is, it can be both indirect and direct transfer or secondary and primary transfer.

Also the fact the fibers were found in the wine-cellar, on items, not in regular use by the R's, manifestly reduces the odds of indirect transfer, and in Patsy's case, close to zero. Since she said she never visited the wine-cellar the night before or the morning after, when she wore the same clothes on both occassions.

So lets hope we can put your focus on a singular method of fiber transfer to bed.


.

 

[MissJ]

Interesting. For JR to name FW as a suspect, given your theory, he had a lot to lose. If he needed FW's cooperation not to spill the beans about the true identity of the killer, he risked everything by pointing a finger at his confidant.

Just MOO but if I were FW this would shut me up.....that I'd better zip it.

 

[DeeDee249]

FW knows more than he has said publicly. We don't know all of what he may have said to LE. But one thing is clear- JR's threats to point a finger at him certainly did shut him up. The thing is- FW was likely suspicious from the very first. He was working things out in his mind, going over the crime scene, etc. But the behavior of the Rs certainly had him believing they were hiding something. FW did not witness the crime and had no proof, just his suspicions. I doubt the Rs confessed to him the exact events of the night. FW contaminated the crime scene, too. He touched the tape and her foot and likely other things.
This was a compromised crime scene, thanks to the BPD. He really didn't have a choice. His testimony couldn't really have been used against the Rs because he could not prove it. And I doubt the Rs and their defense team would have been able to make anything stick to FW either. After all, he admitted touching the duct tape and it was detective Arndt herself who sent him with JR to contaminate the crime scene.
But he may not have wanted to be dragged through the mud, or his family, and the expense of defending himself- all may have played a part. If he couldn't prove the Rs were guilty, he'd also have to prove he wasn't. I do not think it would have ever gotten that far, but he didn't have a dog in the race, you know?

 

[Rashi'sDaughter]

I know it has been suggested previously, but it would be amazing if FW would come forward and speak to Tricia. Never gonna happen though.

 

[Anyhoo]

I voted both were somehow involved in what happened.

 

[UKGuy]

I know it has been suggested previously, but it would be amazing if FW would come forward and speak to Tricia. Never gonna happen though.

Rashi'sDaughter,
Never say never. Times change, people move on. Look at Kolars book and how he infers an R killed JonBenet.

Tricia could mail FW a request for interview on his terms, with a view to public comment on the contents of Kolar's book.

Nothing to stop Tricia asking FW if he noticed anything different regarding the contents of wine-cellar between visits?

FW does not need to offer Tricia details just his general views.


.

 

[SunnieRN]

I would also like to know about the falling out the Ramsey's had with the Stines. They were certainly close enough at one time.

 

[Nom de plume]

I would also like to know about the falling out the Ramsey's had with the Stines. They were certainly close enough at one time.

Seems the R's fell out with just about everyone, except of course the DA's office. :waitasec:

 

[DeeDee249]

I would also like to know about the falling out the Ramsey's had with the Stines. They were certainly close enough at one time.

I think we'd ALL like to know more about it. They were RABID supporters of the Rs in the aftermath of the crime- which is odd considering JR described them as "friends, but not really all that close" or words to that effect.

I mean, who quits jobs, sells a house and pulls kids out of school and moves to another state follow "not that close" friends. There was a reason why they needed to keep them close, believe me. To ensure silence maybe? JR gave him a job, too.