What we don't know

[Linda7NJ]

Trixie posted on another thread her thoughts about the possibility that the entire autopsy report was not released to the public. I honestly hadn't thought of that before, but I can see that it could be something that LE is still holding onto.

Why would only a partial report have been released? Is this a common practice...to satisfy the public? Anyone know?

I always thought autopsy reports were a matter of public record?

 

[Nuisanceposter]

I always thought autopsy reports were a matter of public record?

Not when there's an investigation going on and details in the autopsy are needed to be kept quiet in order to ferret out the killer.

 

[tipper]

Not when there's an investigation going on and details in the autopsy are needed to be kept quiet in order to ferret out the killer.

​

http://www.longmontfyi.com/ramsey/storyDetail97.asp?ID=83

5/16/1997

Ramsey autopsy to become more open

by Pam Regensberg
Daily Times-Call

BOULDER -- By Wednesday morning, the public will know more about the death of former Little Miss Colorado JonBenet Ramsey .

District Court Judge Carol Glowinsky ruled late Thursday that JonBenet's autopsy report -- except for six edited portions -- will be released. Glowinsky's ruling largely opens documents she sealed 90 days ago.

[...]
Kelley on Wednesday filed an objection to keeping the document sealed for an additional 90 days.
Glowinsky, however, partly sided with Kelley.

``Despite 90 additional days of intensive investigation, the coroner argues that the case is still within the early stage of investigation,'' Glowinsky wrote. ``After a review of the limited evidence offered by the coroner to support this conclusion, the court finds that while the investigation remains active, it is no longer in its early stages.''

Therefore, much of the autopsy will be unsealed next Wednesday.

Much of the information the coroner sought to restrict is technical and medical in nature and is the type of evidence investigators are not likely to receive through tips and leads, she said.

Glowinsky ruled the coroner did not meet the burden of proof needed to keep the records under wraps.

Nevertheless, Glowinsky did grant the county's request to keep six portions of the public record sealed for an additional 90 days. She said some of the information is descriptive and could be used to substantiate certain leads being pursued by police.

After 90 days, the entire autopsy report will be unsealed.

​

 

[Nehemiah]

The full report was reported to have been released on Aug. 13. http://www.cnn.com/US/9703/ramsey.case/final.autopsy.html But, how would we as the public know if anything were kept secret and not really released? Is it common practice for a "full and complete" autopsy report to be released to the public, yet portions redacted for LE?

 

[trixie]

You know, I first got this idea from eithor Cyril Wecht or someone who had written about it and there were things stated that I hadn't read in the autopsy report. I think there are two. One to satisfy the publics need to know and another more detailed one the coroner or holds on to in case there is a trial. I think there are things in that second report that would shed some light on some of the questions we have. If anyone thinks things like this aren't done think again. I'll bet it's perfectly legal too since it's still an open case.

 

[Zman]

You know, I first got this idea from eithor Cyril Wecht or someone who had written about it and there were things stated that I hadn't read in the autopsy report. I think there are two. One to satisfy the publics need to know and another more detailed one the coroner or holds on to in case there is a trial. I think there are things in that second report that would shed some light on some of the questions we have. If anyone thinks things like this aren't done think again. I'll bet it's perfectly legal too since it's still an open case.

Now after reading Tippers post above how could you say it's "perfectly legal". It obviously would not be since the judge ordered the entire report released.

 

[trixie]

Now after reading Tippers post above how could you say it's "perfectly legal". It obviously would not be since the judge ordered the entire report released.

If there are two reports then one may have been released in it's entirety.

 

[Zman]

If there are two reports then one may have been released in it's entirety.

So what your saying is LE may be dishonest with evidence claims.

 

[trixie]

Evidence claims? I wasn't aware there has been a trial and all evidence had to be turned over to the defense. I'm not saying I know any of this for sure but I truly do suspect there is a more complete, more detailed autopsy report that the public hasn't been made privy to. You don't have to believe it, but I do. My gosh, just think about all the things we don't know. The PUBLIC certainly doesn't have all the evidence. What about the mysterious DNA found at the crime scene, not on Jonbenets body? This is yet a THIRD DNA sample that hasn't been matched to anybody. This is not the DNA found in her panites or under her nails. This evidence has not been written about in ANY book to date. This is just an example of how much the public doesn't know. A tremendous amount, I think. So why is it so hard to believe that the autopsy report released to the public is the one and only one?

 

[Zman]

Evidence claims? I wasn't aware there has been a trial and all evidence had to be turned over to the defense. I'm not saying I know any of this for sure but I truly do suspect there is a more complete, more detailed autopsy report that the public hasn't been made privy to. You don't have to believe it, but I do. My gosh, just think about all the things we don't know. The PUBLIC certainly doesn't have all the evidence. What about the mysterious DNA found at the crime scene, not on Jonbenets body? This is yet a THIRD DNA sample that hasn't been matched to anybody. This is not the DNA found in her panites or under her nails. This evidence has not been written about in ANY book to date. This is just an example of how much the public doesn't know. A tremendous amount, I think. So why is it so hard to believe that the autopsy report released to the public is the one and only one?

I just believe the opposite, there's less evidence then we are led to believe.

 

[trixie]

Here is a link to an example of evidence that we do not know about.

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/11262001Depo-MarkBeckner.txt

Scroll down to section 120 and read through section 139. Pay special attention to section 121, and 123, because that is proof we don't know all the evidence in this case.

When you have time you should read the whole depo, it's quite interesting and informative. I've narrowed it down for you considerably so it won't take much time and hopefully you and others reading this will read it. I'd like to discuss it. I have some thoughts.

 

[capps]

Here is a link to an example of evidence that we do not know about.

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/11262001Depo-MarkBeckner.txt

Scroll down to section 120 and read through section 139. Pay special attention to section 121, and 123, because that is proof we don't know all the evidence in this case.

When you have time you should read the whole depo, it's quite interesting and informative. I've narrowed it down for you considerably so it won't take much time and hopefully you and others reading this will read it. I'd like to discuss it. I have some thoughts.

Trixie,

I quickly read the depo,not the whole depo,only the area which you advised to read.

Interesting ...
If I'm understanding it correctly,they have foreign DNA,that is not from JonBenet's clothing or body. Then where is this DNAX found ... and more importantly .... who's is it?

What are your thoughts?

 

[trixie]

Well ,I have no idea where it was found but it seems it was found after the Grand Jury disbanded.

My thought when reading it were that this DNA is FEMALE.

That's why Beckner couldn't say why it was not compared to Chris Wolfs. He said it would be getting into evidence, and so of course he couldn't and didn't have to go there. That's the only reason I can think of why unidentified DNA wouldn't have been compared to Chris Wolfs, unlike the other foreign DNA found on Jonbenets underwear and under her nails which they know is male.

If you read between the lines you'll see it in Beckners responses.

 

[Zman]

Here is a link to an example of evidence that we do not know about.

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/11262001Depo-MarkBeckner.txt

Scroll down to section 120 and read through section 139. Pay special attention to section 121, and 123, because that is proof we don't know all the evidence in this case.

When you have time you should read the whole depo, it's quite interesting and informative. I've narrowed it down for you considerably so it won't take much time and hopefully you and others reading this will read it. I'd like to discuss it. I have some thoughts.

Have to admit that 120-140 is as close to Abbott and Costello's "Who's on First" as you can get.

Sounds like a cop throwing out threats.
We have other DNA. Everyone worry.

 

[narlacat]

Here is a link to an example of evidence that we do not know about.

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/11262001Depo-MarkBeckner.txt

Scroll down to section 120 and read through section 139. Pay special attention to section 121, and 123, because that is proof we don't know all the evidence in this case.

When you have time you should read the whole depo, it's quite interesting and informative. I've narrowed it down for you considerably so it won't take much time and hopefully you and others reading this will read it. I'd like to discuss it. I have some thoughts.

It IS quite interesting and informative. Thanks for the link Trixie.
The depo's and interviews are interesting reading.

 

[Linda7NJ]

IMO The Ramseys are far more twisted than most give them credit for. Just how twisted, we don't know.

 

[Zman]

IMO The Ramseys are far more twisted than most give them credit for. Just how twisted, we don't know.

What would make you think that?
Twisted how?

 

[trixie]

I don't know if I would call them twisted. Well, maybe. I honestly think they were a normal happy family up until the night of Dec. 25,1996. Because of that tragedy they have had to go into CYA and cover-up mode and that makes them seem twisted because of all the bizarre things they've had to do and say. But before that I really don't see anything twisted about them. I think Patsy is spoiled rotten and used to being protected and taken care of and coddled and getting what she wants. That comes out to me in her interviews. Some of the answers she gives I'd be embarrassed about but she obviously is not because she's spoiled so it's all normal for her. (I definately can detect a huge lack of communication between Patsy and John. I don't think they talked or interacted all that much, they didn't seem to know that much about each other.)

The only kind of twisted thing I can think of before JB was killed is when Patsy said the doll in the box looked like JB in a coffin. Where was her mindset for that thought to even occur to her? I dunno, I think I would see a doll in a box.