Father says DNA could solve one of country’s biggest murder mysteries: Who killed JonBenét Ramsey

[Ponytale]

"So I believe the jurors on this case"... The only interview I have found was part of a 20/20 episode, and while the 20/20 commentary was long, the interview segments with the grand juror they showed were very brief. I have found lots of YouTube content where people are giving their own takes at length, but none that actually show more direct interview content where we see a (the) grand juror saying things themself.

Are you saying we have more than that, ie more than one juror on camera, and more coming from their mouth on camera than the brief comments on 20/20? If so, link please.

Yes, I do believe the jurors on this case.
The grand juror was talking for himself on that video. It was brief, but it was direct not someone else's interpretation. I have no reason to doubt his words no matter where it was aired.

 

[Val1943]

 

[SteveS]

Yes, I do believe the jurors on this case.
The grand juror was talking for himself on that video. It was brief, but it was direct not someone else's interpretation. I have no reason to doubt his words no matter where it was aired.

So I will ask again - what is the URL of that You Tube video you viewed, so I can see it too, and can transcribe it if we wish for further consideration?

I wasn't quibbling about it being on You Tube, but wanted to see it for myself. In the 20/20 original, the juror said very little, and afaik didn't say some of what you reported, but perhaps I missed something. You said "I just watched an interview on Youtube..." so I want to get the URL to where it is.

BTW you say jurors, but there has only been 1 juror speak afaik (so it's not "jurors" speaking, but just the personal pov of 1 out of 12). He can't (and didn't claim to) speak for the others. Their indictment was not necessarily unanimous.

So what's the URL link to what you viewed? Thanks in advance.

EDITED TO ADD -- VAL 1943, thanks for sharing that recent video ^. It does a great job of clearly explaining the evolution of the DNA identification process, and showing some of the recent developments that might make that DNA more identifiable now.

 

[GRT]

The killers are properly dead and cremated hopefully this case can be solved like this one

DNA evidence helps identify woman’s killer 36 years after her death​

How genetic genealogy cracked the case

https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/08/us/tracy-whitney-cold-case-dna-evidence/index.html

I sure hope the killer is identified—some day.

DNA technology has skyrocketed--the problems they had with the "composite" sample on JonBenet's clothing might soon (even, now) be able to pinpoint the killer.

So many stories. So very many theories.

It's too late for true justice, in my opinion. Because for 30 years (if JonBenet's killer is alive), he's escaped punishment for torturing and killing a beautiful, innocent child.

If he dies before being caught--or has died--there can be no righting of the wrong. I like to think of justice as a balance of sorts. Real justice would have been catching him right away and putting him in an 8 X 10 cell for the rest of his miserable life.

But, I pray DNA solves this mystery--one way or the other. JonBenet and her family have suffered way too long. It's the last thing we can do for the memory of that wee child.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

It's clear the jury didn't think they were guilty of murder--they didn't hand down any true bills accusing either of murder.

They did think they were guilty of child abuse, ostensibly allowing her to come into contact with the murderer or perhaps even putting her on pageant stages, which may have drawn pedo types. They also thought the Ramseys were guilty of accessory- they did, after all, not pay close attention to locking their doors, and they gave virtually anyone keys to their home, but they didn't monitor if those keys returned.

So yes, the GJ thought they were guilty of something.

But, that something wasn't murder.

So do you think they are saying for instance, you put your child in Boy Scouts where there could be preditors and your child is SAd and murdered, it's some how your fault?

 

[Slebby]

Patsy’s handwriting was not a match. She didn’t have an 80% match to the ransom note. She scored 4.5 out of 5 with 5 being no match at all. Case closed. This case is a DNA case. Match the dna to someone and you have your killer. The killer was someone who was angry with John, someone related to his company. I’m hopeful they will test the last remaining half of the bloodspot found in jonbenets underoants this year and upload it to familial dna companies where it’s likely to receive familial hits.

You keep saying case closed, you should inform the BPD.
You have no way of knowing “the killer was someone who was angry with John”, all you’re relying on is the RN. The RN also says it’s a kidnapping and that wasn’t true.
I don’t care one way or another if the dna is retested. I am sure the BPD has reasons it has not been done, to which we are not privy.

 

[FMB]

Yes. The killer most definitely was/is crazy and he has a connection to John’s business. There’s no evidence linking the Ramsey family to the murder because if the police had evidence, they would have prosecuted them decades ago. Patsy Ramsey was not the author of the ransom note. Forget the money hungry tv shows, the forensic tests done through the police ruled her out. Case closed!

Case closed?? Who did they end up convicting? Man, did I miss something?

 

[Slebby]

Those handwriting tests done on tv shows aren’t even accurate. You can’t use copies of copies to examine the handwriting of patsy and the ransom note. They’ve never even seen the original and there’s no proof those examples are even patsys handwriting. Those people aren’t even fully qualified.

I cited Cina Wong, whose work has stood up repeatedly in a court of law. I trust her expertise more than, say, yours.
I’m not sure how her expertise becomes diminished by the mere fact it appears on tv?
Here’s her website Media Appearances - Cina Wong | Forensic Handwriting Expert
Pretty impressive, imo

 

[FMB]

I cited Cina Wong, whose work has stood up repeatedly in a court of law. I trust her expertise more than, say, yours.
I’m not sure how her expertise becomes diminished by the mere fact it appears on tv?
Here’s her website Media Appearances - Cina Wong | Forensic Handwriting Expert
Pretty impressive, imo

Yes, there were many handwriting experts that the concluded that Patsy wrote the RN......
Had it gone to trial....if the jury decided that Patsy wrote the note....Patsy would go down on an accessory charge...
The grand jury certainly believed she wrote it.

 

[Ponytale]

The jurors indictment, IMO, presents, that they’re both convicted of putting JB in harm and assisting to cover up a crime.

They both
"....did unlawfully, knowingly, recklessly, and feloniously permit a child to be unreasonably placed in a situation which posed a threat of injury to the child's life or health, which resulted in the death of JBR, a child under 16 years of age."


"....did unlawfully, knowingly, and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction, and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of murder in the first degree and Child Abuse Resulting In Death."

The keyword in both of these indictments is knowingly, IMO.

IMO, these charges only point to one person and leave a little room for imagination.

It was stated somewhere, that GJ cannot charge the parents to be accessories when the actual murderer cannot be charged due to age limitations. Correct me if I'm wrong. So, if that is the case, they just can not be an accessory of a murderer that can never be convicted. And it explains the indictments. There were three people in that house, and one of them didn't get an indictment for murder from the Grand Jury only because that person can’t be tried for murder. In my opinion.

 

[Slebby]

T

The ransom note was left before he fled the scene. He didn’t put the ransom note out before he killed her. He wrote it before the murder while the ramseys were at the whites Christmas party then after he killed her he went back upstairs, left the note and fled. There are lots of attacks from men hiding in the house for hours prior to carrying out their attacks. The ransom note was designed to give John false hope, to control the aftermath and taunt John. I haven’t found any evidence linking John or patsy to the murder. There’s lots of forensic evidence suggesting an intruder it. Of course it’s a possibility John or patsy did it but it’s not probable. Patsy went on tv days after the murder medicated to her eye balls! She never slipped up once while under the influence of powerful sedatives. Unless there’s concrete evidence pointing to the parents, I don’t believe they had any involvement in the murder. There’s only theories and speculation like Burke hit her over the head and the parents finished her off and staged the scene. There’s absolutely no evidence to back that up. Absolutely none!

The way I would say all of this differently, would be to say “I have a theory. Here it is” because you have said a whole lot here that you don’t know or can’t know unless you’re the killer. Then I would finish by saying “my opinion”, because that’s all it is.
How do you know he was in the house and wrote the RN while the Rs were at the Whites’? Your assertion that there “are lots of attacks from men hiding in the house for hours” is not evidence, any more than the fact that many parents kill their children is not evidence one of the Rs killed their child, you see?
How do you know the motive of the RN, “to give John false hope”, to “taunt”?

Can you list the forensic evidence, “lots of forensic evidence suggesting an intruder did it”?
If you say PR was medicated to the eyeballs, I’m not sure how you know. But I don’t know how keeping your story straight in an interview while medicated is proof of innocence. But I can see that you believe it.

Yes, I agree, there is a lot of theories and speculation.

As always, JMO

 

[SteveS]

I cited Cina Wong, whose work has stood up repeatedly in a court of law. I trust her expertise more than, say, yours.
I’m not sure how her expertise becomes diminished by the mere fact it appears on tv?
Here’s her website Media Appearances - Cina Wong | Forensic Handwriting Expert
Pretty impressive, imo

CW's "expertise" is not proven by her own website's praise.

And it is diminished because the DA's office and then a court ruled she was NOT qualified to be an expert witness on handwriting in JBR case. She tried to insert herself into the case, but she did NOT use the proper methodology or have the necessary credentials, making her opinion unreliable and unusable as evidence.

"In September 1998, Ms. Wong wrote District Attorney Hunter, Assistant District Attorney Michael Kane, and Judge Roxanne Bailin, asking to testify before the Grand Jury. (SMF 347; PSMF 347.) By letter dated January 20, 1999, Mr. Hunter rejected the request, informing Ms. Wong that it was his opinion that she did not use scientifically reliable methods, her testimony would be inadmissible, and that she lacked credibility. (SMF 348; PSMF 348.)"

So she sued the DA's office, trying to force herself into the mix. That court turned her away as unqualified.

"For the reasons discussed below, the Court concludes that defendants' motion [the defendants were the DA's office that she had sued to force her way in] should be GRANTED as to Ms. Wong.

"Wong has never taken a certification exam, completed an accreditation course in document examination, been an apprentice to an ABFDE certified document examiner, or worked in a crime lab. (Wong Dep. at 87-112.) She does, however, claim nearly ten years of experience in the field. (Pl's Br. In Opp. To Defs.' Mot. In Limine [87] at 9.) She, however, is not a member of the ABFDE, the sole recognized organization for accreditation of qualified forensic document examiners. Although she is the former vice president of the National Association of Document Examiners ("NADE"), (PSDMF 12), defendants note that this organization does not meet ABFDE certification requirements, has no permanent office and has no membership requirements other than the payment of a fee. (Defs.' Mot. In Limine [68] at 6.) Wong, herself, admits that NADE does not require specialized training or experience for its certification. (Wong Dep. at 87-89.) Accordingly, the Court concludes Ms. Wong is not qualified to provide reliable handwriting analysis in this case."

I also found this info, which is related to the case and perhaps informative as to the nature of the handwriting analysis that was used. It's a letter from a lawyer to a handwriting expert, it seems, and offers him the view of multiple experts in the field that "the similarities between Patsy and the ransom note writer's handwriting is at the very lowest end of the spectrum, ie there is little or no basis for match." I didn't dig out the background of the writer and letter, but it might be of value to know.

https://imgur.com/tdWF6e3

 

[GRT]

So do you think they are saying for instance, you put your child in Boy Scouts where there could be preditors and your child is SAd and murdered, it's some how your fault?

I don't think they were saying exactly that -- but they did hand down true bills on accessory and child abuse that seemed to indicate that the GJ felt as though the Ramseys put JBR in a dangerous situation that made it possible for her killer to gain access to her.

The stories put out by the tabloids about JBR and the Ramseys focused on how her parents were sexualizing her by dolling her up and putting her in pageants. The jurors could not escape all that sensationalism, and I think that played a role in handing down true bills for things other than murder.

DA Hunter knew enough about the law that he understood those charges would never go anywhere, but it let the GJ off the hook, so to speak.

The saddest part is that a family who loved their daughter very much was unfairly tried in the court of public opinion--and it destroyed them. I would be willing to bet that the grief and stress played a role in Patsy's cancer returning.

All MOO

 

[GRT]

I cited Cina Wong, whose work has stood up repeatedly in a court of law. I trust her expertise more than, say, yours.
I’m not sure how her expertise becomes diminished by the mere fact it appears on tv?
Here’s her website Media Appearances - Cina Wong | Forensic Handwriting Expert
Pretty impressive, imo

I think Cina is probably better now, but she was recruited by Chris Wolf, and keep in mind that Chris was also a suspect and his handwriting sample was a much closer match to the ransom note than Patsy's was. In fact, Forensic Document Expert, Thomas Grogan, said it was a match.

 

[Slebby]

CW's "expertise" is not proven by her own website's praise.

And it is diminished because the DA's office and then a court ruled she was NOT qualified to be an expert witness on handwriting in JBR case. She tried to insert herself into the case, but she did NOT use the proper methodology or have the necessary credentials, making her opinion unreliable and unusable as evidence.

"In September 1998, Ms. Wong wrote District Attorney Hunter, Assistant District Attorney Michael Kane, and Judge Roxanne Bailin, asking to testify before the Grand Jury. (SMF 347; PSMF 347.) By letter dated January 20, 1999, Mr. Hunter rejected the request, informing Ms. Wong that it was his opinion that she did not use scientifically reliable methods, her testimony would be inadmissible, and that she lacked credibility. (SMF 348; PSMF 348.)"

So she sued the DA's office, trying to force herself into the mix. That court turned her away as unqualified.

"For the reasons discussed below, the Court concludes that defendants' motion [the defendants were the DA's office that she had sued to force her way in] should be GRANTED as to Ms. Wong.

"Wong has never taken a certification exam, completed an accreditation course in document examination, been an apprentice to an ABFDE certified document examiner, or worked in a crime lab. (Wong Dep. at 87-112.) She does, however, claim nearly ten years of experience in the field. (Pl's Br. In Opp. To Defs.' Mot. In Limine [87] at 9.) She, however, is not a member of the ABFDE, the sole recognized organization for accreditation of qualified forensic document examiners. Although she is the former vice president of the National Association of Document Examiners ("NADE"), (PSDMF 12), defendants note that this organization does not meet ABFDE certification requirements, has no permanent office and has no membership requirements other than the payment of a fee. (Defs.' Mot. In Limine [68] at 6.) Wong, herself, admits that NADE does not require specialized training or experience for its certification. (Wong Dep. at 87-89.) Accordingly, the Court concludes Ms. Wong is not qualified to provide reliable handwriting analysis in this case."

I also found this info, which is related to the case and perhaps informative as to the nature of the handwriting analysis that was used. It's a letter from a lawyer to a handwriting expert, it seems, and offers him the view of multiple experts in the field that "the similarities between Patsy and the ransom note writer's handwriting is at the very lowest end of the spectrum, ie there is little or no basis for match." I didn't dig out the background of the writer and letter, but it might be of value to know.

https://imgur.com/tdWF6e3

That sheds a lot of factual info into the conversation, Steve, thank you.

 

[FMB]

I think Cina is probably better now, but she was recruited by Chris Wolf, and keep in mind that Chris was also a suspect and his handwriting sample was a much closer match to the ransom note than Patsy's was. In fact, Forensic Document Expert, Thomas Grogan, said it was a match.

Just curious.....did you look at her ( Cina's) analysis of the RN and Patsy's samples??? Did you notice that some letters were identical matches?? The odds are astronomical that an intruder could write an RN that so closely resembles Patsy's writing style

 

[Slebby]

Just curious.....did you look at her ( Cina's) analysis of the RN and Patsy's samples??? Did you notice that some letters were identical matches?? The odds are astronomical that an intruder could write an RN that so closely resembles Patsy's writing style

This is my belief as well. To look at the comparisons side by side, it is very compellingly similar.
I am not in a court of law, I’m not an expert, I am on Websleuths, and so I can say this, when I use my own eyeballs, I see such similarity as to be indistinguishable from PR to RN. It feels intellectually honest to concede that it looks the same to me. And I’m not sure how any IDI can’t use their own eyes and find it problematic.
That’s just my opinion.

 

[GRT]

Just curious.....did you look at her ( Cina's) analysis of the RN and Patsy's samples??? Did you notice that some letters were identical matches?? The odds are astronomical that an intruder could write an RN that so closely resembles Patsy's writing style

You might have a point if Cina had been more experienced at that time. Keep in mind that handwriting analysis wasn't even her specialty, and she wasn't certified.

Here is a link to her deposition.

How do you explain Thomas Grogan, a certified forensic document examiner, stating that the compilation of Chris Wolf's journal entries—when compared against the ransom note—was a match?

 

[GRT]

This is my belief as well. To look at the comparisons side by side, it is very compellingly similar.
I am not in a court of law, I’m not an expert, I am on Websleuths, and so I can say this, when I use my own eyeballs, I see such similarity as to be indistinguishable from PR to RN. It feels intellectually honest to concede that it looks the same to me. And I’m not sure how any IDI can’t use their own eyes and find it problematic.
That’s just my opinion.

So, what do you think of the Chris Wolf handwriting analysis?

Also, keep in mind that the BPD never accepted Cina's analysis because their own expert said that while PR could not be eliminated, her score was 4-1/2. She needed a 5 to be eliminated. She received a low similarity from the police expert.

Cina wasn't certified in handwriting analysis, and that wasn't even her specialty.

 

[FMB]

So, what do you think of the Chris Wolf handwriting analysis?

Also, keep in mind that the BPD never accepted Cina's analysis because their own expert said that while PR could not be eliminated, her score was 4-1/2. She needed a 5 to be eliminated. She received a low similarity from the police expert.

Cina wasn't certified in handwriting analysis, and that wasn't even her specialty.

The last couple of posts were not about the handwriting Experts credentials , they were about seeing the side by side comparisons with our own eyes. The question put to you was if you had the opportunity to view the side by side and see the identical matches?.

Ill go ahead and post all the credentialed experts that concluded Patsy wrote the note.