Why Patsy did not kill JonBenet

[Seeker]

It's a FACT Gelb is one of the most respected polygraph examiners in the nation, and he excluded Patsy as the killer of JonBenet and as the writer of the ransom note.

Blue, while I also do not believe Patsy killed JonBenet you need to get some more info on what you are using as disputing points in your arguements.

It is a FACT that Gelb's opinion on polygraph results can and has been, bought and paid for. It's a FACT that Gelb LIED about having a valid PHD (and continues to do so, see his website for verification of my statement. http://www.polygraphexpert.com/
He also writes about himself in the third person! Check his resume http://www.antipolygraph.org/articles/gelb-resume-2002.pdf ). A man who will lie about his credentials will lie about other things, that is a FACT. He only excluded Patsy and John because he was PAID TO DO IT! That is a FACT.

 

[Shylock]

Shylock, please stop it. Speckin concluded nothing of the kind.
Here's Speckin's full statement:

You've only got HALF the story, BlueCrab.

"And the Speckin Lab was ready to testify that there was only an infinitesimal chance that some random intruder would have handwriting characteristics so remarkably similar to those of a parent sleeping upstairs."
(ITRMI - page 200)

Get it now BlueCrab? Patsy can't be identified as the author, but nobody else could have written it--THAT MEANS SHE WROTE IT!

You're playing games with the whole issue BC. NO handwriting expert can identify someone's writing that's DISGUISED. If Abraham Lincoln wrote a document in disguised writing NONE OF THEM would be able to identify him as the author--even though his handwriting is very well known from many documents going back to when he was a teenage law student. Like Patsy, they would all say he "couldn't be eliminated as the author".
Disguised writing goes against the whole basic principal of handwriting analysis.

 

[Shylock]

No Shylock; Patsy did not fail Torillo's lie-detector tests -- those results were inconclusive. Please stick to the facts.

What BlueCrab, you're buying into Lin Wood's spin? He says "inconclusive", but the fact is that any test given by a polygrapher that is "inconclusive" is simply run over again. Even Gelb will tell you that. PATSY FAILED TO PASS THE FIRST TEST GIVEN BY TORILLO.

That's a FACT that can't be denied. Torillo has even said he is under a confidentially agreement and can't discuss the details of the test. Gee, don't ya wonder WHY, BlueCrab? Didn't you wonder why he wasn't present when the polygraph announcements were made? Were you foolish enough to believe another of Wood's lies that Torillo couldn't attend because of a dentist appointment?

 

[Shylock]

IN NO way shape or form was Burke Ramsey involved in the murder or cover-up of his little sister. The child was questioned TWICE, once by a professional Psychologist. No way IMO could a 9-year-old child hide the fact that he murdered accidentally or otherwise another human being.

Ned, what makes you think the "professional Psychologist" was even delving into the possibility that Burke killed his sister? The BPD had a mental block on Burke as the perp from day one. They even managed to convince the FBI that Burke couldn't be involved. At the request of the BPD, the "professional Psychologist" probably spent all his time asking Burke questions about his parent's involvement when he should have been asking about his OWN actions that night.

Any 10-year old can swing an object hard enough to crack the skull of a 6-year old. Burke certainly had the ability and opportunity to commit the crime.

I will however agree with you on the coverup. If Burke is involved, his parents did the cover up to protect him.

 

[Seeker]

Yeah Ned, but remember when Burke was questioned by the police officer at the White's on that very same day little "innocent" Burke BALD FACED LIED TO HIM!!!

If he deliberately lied to the officer, what do you think the odds are that he wouldn't have lied to anyone else?

 

[allan]

Did that maybe come from the small faction?

 

[Miss Daisey]

Did that maybe come from the small faction?

Great question, Allan....Did that DNA on JonBenet and under her finger nails come from someone while she was at the White's home on Christmas night?

 

[BlueCrab]

Great question, Allan....Did that DNA on JonBenet and under her finger nails come from someone while she was at the White's home on Christmas night?

Miss Daisey,

Please remember that the DNA with 10 markers came from the second spot of blood that was on the size 12-14 panties JonBenet was wearing. The over-sized 12-14 panties were obviously put on her after death, so the DNA likely came from blood seepage after she was cleaned up, re-dressed, and wrapped in the white blanket. Therefore, the DNA couldn't have come from the White's house.

Allan had suggested that the DNA may have come from a member of the "foreign faction", and that is a possibility. IMO there was a fifth person in the house that night, but he had to have been invited in, or the Ramseys wouldn't be lying and covering up. There was no intruder. The Ramseys wouldn't be lying and covering up to protect an intruder.

JMO

 

[Miss Daisey]

Miss Daisey,

Please remember that the DNA with 10 markers came from the second spot of blood that was on the size 12-14 panties JonBenet was wearing. The over-sized 12-14 panties were obviously put on her after death, so the DNA likely came from blood seepage after she was cleaned up, re-dressed, and wrapped in the white blanket. Therefore, the DNA couldn't have come from the White's house.

Allan had suggested that the DNA may have come from a member of the "foreign faction", and that is a possibility. IMO there was a fifth person in the house that night, but he had to have been invited in, or the Ramseys wouldn't be lying and covering up. There was no intruder. The Ramseys wouldn't be lying and covering up to protect an intruder.

JMO

Blue Crab,

I follow on the evidence of the blood on the oversized 12-14 underwear. It's obvious she was dressed in them after the crime...or it would appear so. I don't understand the reference of the "seepage" though.

My response to Allen about the foreign DNA was to also question the DNA under JonBenet's finger nails. Is it the same DNA under the nails as the DNA found in the blood? If so, it's possible it got there before the Ramseys arrived back home from the Whites.

I haven't read anything anywhere to suggest that JonBenet was bathed or had her hands washed before going to bed.

I go with the theory that the two boys, while in the basement w/JonBenet accidentally killed her while performing the "choking game". I can imagine that that's exactly what happened. Then the coverup by the parents to follow. If that's what happened, the adult that taught them how to do that is culpible, whether on the scene of not.

But once the stun gun is factored in,(if there was one) the theory changes because that, IMO, isn't the work of two nine year olds. It's too noisey..too risky with two parents in the house.

I'm opening my mind to an intruder. There were too many keys to the house. Six returned...3 missing. While there's no evidence of an intruder that I've seen or read...if Burke and Doug didn't do it....there's a posibility it could turn out to be another Elizebeth Smart type circumstance. Not necessarily one that was unknown to the Ramseys.

 

[TLynn]

Seeker, what did Burke lie about?


Shylock, I agree and thanks for your diligence.



Why is it determined that the oversized panties were put on after the murder?

 

[Eagle1]

All the experts who said nobody else could have written the note were simply assuming nobody else was in the house.

They probably should have said it, in fact.

He was such a skilled intruder, or just lucky, there was no evidence he'd been there, except the dictionary, imo, someone had left open to the word Incest. I know what most will say because we've been through this so many times, but I don't think either of the parents would have been THAT careless, not to close the dictionary. Neither would they have planted that evidence against themselves. And didn't they say it was someone who'd had a vasectomy, no sperm in the semen?

The R's really may not know who did it, and only did the coverup, if they did it or some of it, because they knew immediately they would be under suspicion.

Have we discussed the two visitors from California at all? Not that I know anything about them except I think one or both belonged to some "Cali" or "Kali" club. 'kalli"? Not sure about the spelling. Something about something in India? A goddess or something? Anyone remember anything about that?

:croc:

 

[gaia]

I can't quite agree with you on all your theories. As for the idea there were others in the house, I'm sure that's quite possible, but it takes quite a lot of cojones to kidnap a child. The people in that house (workers) weren't stupid nor does it seem they were drug addicts. Uh-uh. The intruder theory must be supported by the idea A LARGE GROUP (MORE THAN ONE) HAD THE SAME IDEA ABOUT WHAT TO DO WITH JB AND RANSOM. Uh-uh. I could go on from here, but it's moot. Please know I respect your point of view. Just show me the money...perhaps the reason why it was $118,000 worth. :doh:

 

[Eagle1]

Sorry I didn't see this until now, several days later.

If there were a lot of people in the house, that doesn't mean that they had premeditated the murder, at all! Coroners said it looked like an accident, and it may well have been one.

The broken paint brush was found right outside the wine cellar door, in the boiler room, could have been planted there as part of staging, very cunning, but doesn't necessarily mean she was killed in the house, (I have no opinion, in the house or elsewhere, but FW claimed not to have seen the body at 6-something am.)

I have to agree an intruder, or some kind of weird party gang having an accident, would have to be awfully cunning, or, a lot of minds working together, to not leave any more clues that someone has already listed, so we can't say he or they left none.

Remember, Patsy said, "THEY killed my baby." Along with "We didn't mean for this to happen" and the whistleblower Nancy's testimony which some are so sure is lies. Can anyone post her testimony, btw?

Editing to add, I really think it was an unguarded moment when Patsy said those two things, she evidently was not thinking might be reported. I think it's highly significant that she said "THEY killed my baby, as if she knew exactly that the parents' being too trusting had this result, and they would have to do a cover up rather than admit as Danielle Van Dam's parents did, a questionable lifestyle.

 

[Miss Daisey]

I won't ignore the foreign DNA. If they ever find a match to it, I want to hear what the defence for it is. It is bizarre that it is degraded, but it is also bizarre that it is there. I want to know whose it is and how it got there.

One thing which I thihnk is exculpatory for Patsy is the fact that when asked if she would take a polygraph, she said she would take "ten of them". I also just cannot envisage her killing the child who gave her the reason to live.

I agree Jayelles....The foreign DNA really is the missing link, isn't it? Perhaps another child?

With all the evidence from the Grand Jury sealed there's an effective "wall" that prevents anyone from developing this case further. The children involved are protected by state law and there's no way to change that....unless the United States vs someone for a violation of JonBenet's civil rights to life and persuit of happiness outside the statues of the state of Colorado.

On the eighth anniverary of JonBenet's death, her father was asked (in a TV interview as I recall) if they were concerned about Burke. His response was, "you bet"...this is the kind of thing that surfaces at age 40.

Since I've always believed that Burke was somehow involved in his sister's death, those words have specific meaning IMO. Perhaps more than his father intended.

I watched closely Patsy's statement on TV years ago with her finger wagging when she said, "we'll find you" and it had the same ring as Bill Clinton when he said, "I did not have sex with that woman". He was lying then and so was Patsy in her statement. Like Susan Smith in her statement before the camera. "Yo mama and daddy love you". BS We all knew she was lying because like JonBenet's death...nothing else at the crime scene made any sense. It's logical. Anything else is a long shot, IMO

I've no doubt that Patsy loved JonBenet "with all my heart"...but she loves her son too. She knows what happened and she knows who did it, IMO.

*************
IMO

 

[Nehemiah]

And didn't they say it was someone who'd had a vasectomy, no sperm in the semen? Coroners said it looked like an accident, and it may well have been one.

What semen? There was only semen on the blanket inside the suitcase.

What coroners said that it looked like an accident?

Thanks.

 

[Eagle1]

If I'm not mistaken we already answered that question, chapter 24 of ST??? And someone (Sissi?) said ST might be wrong?

I forget if ST also said there was no sperm in some semen, and where that was. I'm sure it was not on JAR's blanket in the suitcase.

 

[Eagle1]

No sperm in semen would mean someone had a vasectomy? Correct? Could it also happen because they'd had measles in childhood or something like that?

 

[close_enough]

What semen? There was only semen on the blanket inside the suitcase.

What coroners said that it looked like an accident?

Thanks.

you're right...according to Steve Thomas, the CBI lab discovered a semen stain on a blanket inside the suitcase that had been retrieved from the basement. DNA tests matched the specimen to John Andrew, & since he had been cleared, another trail ended where it started....(per the book).....John Andrew had been accounted for, the night/morning JBR was killed....except for the 6 hours he was sleeping at his mother's house....

from everything i've read so far, in this book, there's no telling how many people claimed to have slept in JBR's bed, over a period of time...visits & whatnot....the whole thing is an outrage...i think Patsy killed JBR in a rage over the bedwetting....possibly shoved her, she hit her head...panicked, & one thing led to another, with John covering for her...i also think Burke heard something....that's why he was shuffled out of the house so fast, the next morning.....why would Patsy lie about the clothing JBR went to bed in??...why would John tell several investigators that he had made sure the house was locked up tight, then months later say he never said that.....i just get angry when i think about it.....
i have a friend who thinks the parents had nothing to do with it...she thinks there is no way a parent could have killed that child....heck, it happens all the time...some parents abuse & kill their children; it's that simple....

let me edit this....Patsy said JBR went to bed in a red shirt...turtleneck, i believe....the shirt was wadded up, either in the bedroom, or bathroom (can't remember which)....JBR had an accident at some point, & Patsy had to get some "pull-ups" out & had her change her clothes....
i shouldn't have said Patsy "lied" about what she went to bed in....

 

[Eagle1]

Some of us are in a hurry to get this solved, but I don't think it's going to be that easy or soon.

It's always in the news big time when parents kill their children, it's rare, and their personalities aren't like the R's.

There was also the flashlight that wasn't theirs, with batteries wiped clean of fingerprints, that should have been listed early on in this thread.

I certainly don't think they could have killed JonBenet, or that they would have thought of wiping those batteries.

Doing a coverup was forced on them by whoever was the real killer, because they knew it would look to a lot of people like they did it. We'd do a coverup too. If they knew who it was, he may even have explained to them that they'd better get busy. I've said their sayings sound like they lent JonBenet to some group that night, they wouldn't want to admit knowing or trusting with their precious child. It was stupid, all right. And John was saying he was so sorry. Way to stupid to ever admit to.

They had no choice but to try a coverup. If they did. I sure don't think I'd be able to, and maybe they weren't either. We just don't know yet.

 

[close_enough]

i finished the Thomas book...there were 3 theories about the flashlight...John Andrew gave JR, as a gift, a flashlight that was consistent in color, make, & model to the one found in the house...the Ramseys couldn't account for it, but hedged away from saying that the one discovered by police belonged to them......another theory is that it was left behind by the intruder, in his hurry to escape....the other theory is that some cop left it on the counter by mistake....it was a Mag-Lite type that a lot of policeman use...it was consistent with a piece of equipment being handled in cold weather, by a cop wearing gloves...once the case blew up, no one wanted to claim ownership...just like the palm, & Hi-Tec boot print....

i personally don't think this case will ever be solved...