Has Any Ramsey Defender Ever Given an Explanation for the Pineapple?

I feel pretty stupid right now because I'm not sure if you're serious or being sarcastic - ? It's pretty funny one way or another....

Holdon is right up there with Evening2 with her theories. I would not take her seriously - wastes lots of your time.
 
You would have to check with Boulder PD who I know at least officially cleared "Santa" and his wife but my recollection is that their DNA didn't match that of the "intruder" and so they were cleared, but maybe someone else has more details.....

So since the DNA did not match any of the Ramseys is this how they too have been cleared now?

imo
 
So since the DNA did not match any of the Ramseys is this how they too have been cleared now?

imo

Well, if the theory is an intruder did it and it is the intruder's DNA on the victiim's clothing and that intruder is the killer then anyone whose DNA doesn't match it CANNOT be the killer.

You can't have it both ways, you can't believe the intruder DNA exonerates the Ramseys and also believe that someone can still be a suspect if their DNA doesn't match the foreign DNA on her clothing.
 
You would have to check with Boulder PD who I know at least officially cleared "Santa" and his wife but my recollection is that their DNA didn't match that of the "intruder" and so they were cleared, but maybe someone else has more details.....


Correct.

The lack of a DNA match was used to clear Bill McReynolds (and other suspects). Because LE used the lack of a DNA match to clear suspects, it was entirely reasonable and proper for the D.A. to have used the same lack of a DNA match to clear the Ramseys.
 
Well, if the theory is an intruder did it and it is the intruder's DNA on the victiim's clothing and that intruder is the killer then anyone whose DNA doesn't match it CANNOT be the killer.

You can't have it both ways, you can't believe the intruder DNA exonerates the Ramseys and also believe that someone can still be a suspect if their DNA doesn't match the foreign DNA on her clothing.

If the killer has not been identified except through the DNA evidence found on the victim's clothing and identity remains unknown why cant I suspect them as being the murderer?

Has there been proof that all DNA samples were taken on known persons that they may have suspected at the time? The reason I ask is I heard on Greta, I think it was, that they weren't sure that DNA was ever taken from Bill Reynolds before he died.

imo
 
Pineapple would be good enough at room temp for 2 days, I think. The pineapple would not be overheated in a car crossing the rockie mountains in winter, I think.

Besides, the original topic of this thread was to explain the pineapple, and there you have it.

Oh my, such health conscious kidnappers.... bottled water at room (car) temperature wouldn't be good enough for them... they bring along fresh fruit for their little trip?

Once they are out of Boulder they can stop at any 7-11 & grab a few drinks & snacks.... throw the kid in the trunk of the car & you're just a regular hungry customer.

Not to mention..... HOW dry would their house have been that these kidnappers would worry about hydrating the child even BEFORE they started on their trip? Is that why they didn't leave the house as soon as they grabbed her.... they were waiting to see whether she had enough liquids in her body & if not.... they would feed her MORE pineapple until they were satisfied she wouldn't be thirsty in the car? :rolleyes:
 
If the killer has not been identified except through the DNA evidence found on the victim's clothing and identity remains unknown why cant I suspect them as being the murderer?

Has there been proof that all DNA samples were taken on known persons that they may have suspected at the time? The reason I ask is I heard on Greta, I think it was, that they weren't sure that DNA was ever taken from Bill Reynolds before he died.

imo

I know the Boulder PD were pretty incompetant but if the working theory is that the unknown DNA is that of the killer and they've had this DNA profile since 1997....for what reason wouldn't they have tested it against all the suspects?
 
Anyone? Anyone? Beuhler? Anyone?

My intention was NOT to list EVERY suspect & then go through them one by one by one to see IF there was anyone you thought was excluded too quickly. I wanted to cut to the chase & ask you directly..... IF there were ANY that YOU could name.


Wudge:

More importantly, I'm not concerned about the case. I'm not concerned about John Ramsey. LE did not have him targeted. I'm not concerned about Burke Ramsey. LE did not have him targeted. I'm not concerned about Patsy Ramsey. She has passed on. I'm not concerned about the Ramsey family. They have been exonerated.


LI_Mom:

Wudge, I'm curious.... are you perfectly comfortable with ALL the suspects that have been excluded? If not, which ones do you think are still potential suspects?




Oh and btw, LE DID have all the Ramseys "targeted" (your word) from the start (like they do in EVERY crime scene) & over the course of time excluded them one by one... sometimes for very sound reasons but in some cases (John Ramsey) for less than logical reasons.
 
I know the Boulder PD were pretty incompetant but if the working theory is that the unknown DNA is that of the killer and they've had this DNA profile since 1997....for what reason wouldn't they have tested it against all the suspects?

Better question....

Since the ONLY thing they know for sure from the DNA is that it is male dna..... why wouldn't they test EVERY male that they KNOW JB had contact with the day before & of the party.

What if they find it matches one of the little kids she was playing with before she was put into bed her last night?

Why would anyone want to spend MILLIONS investigating a lead that might be bad when they can easily rule out the possibility with a simple test?

If I were the mother, I'd give LE a list of EVERY child & if necessary, I'd go to every mother on that list & ask them to have their son tested so LE can concentrate on VALID leads only.
 
Oh my, such health conscious kidnappers.... bottled water at room (car) temperature wouldn't be good enough for them... they bring along fresh fruit for their little trip?

Once they are out of Boulder they can stop at any 7-11 & grab a few drinks & snacks.... throw the kid in the trunk of the car & you're just a regular hungry customer.

Not to mention..... HOW dry would their house have been that these kidnappers would worry about hydrating the child even BEFORE they started on their trip? Is that why they didn't leave the house as soon as they grabbed her.... they were waiting to see whether she had enough liquids in her body & if not.... they would feed her MORE pineapple until they were satisfied she wouldn't be thirsty in the car? :rolleyes:


Seahorse said:
Food is an excellent reward for anyone , especially children.


Not just any food would be an excellent reward, but something sweet. Like pineapple, maybe?. TY Seahorse
 
There was pineapple in JBR's stomach, and more pineapple ready to feed JBR. One explanation for this is that the intruder may have intended to feed pineapple to JBR over 2 or 3 days travel by car, for hydration, nourishment, and as a reward for keeping quiet.
 
Not just any food would be an excellent reward, but something sweet. Like pineapple, maybe?. TY Seahorse

It makes no sense.

Rewards? The object of the exercise was to KIDNAP her.... grab the little kid & leave.

You don't spend an extra second in an operation that is not essential... remember we are not dealing with amateurs.... this is a "small foreign faction" for crying out loud.
 
It makes no sense.

Rewards? The object of the exercise was to KIDNAP her.... grab the little kid & leave.

You don't spend an extra second in an operation that is not essential... remember we are not dealing with amateurs.... this is a "small foreign faction" for crying out loud.


I think the ransom note practing writing non kidnapping, non raping or abducting pedophile sex attacking killer was also a psychic.

The intruder must have known in advance that JonBenet liked pineapple! He must have had a vision of it, possibly while writing the ransom note.

OMG I can't really believe anyone seriously believes that an intruder fed this child pineapple and further, was planning to take the pineapple on the road, but then, apparently something went wrong and the kind kidnapper who cared about ensuring the little girl's hydration turns evil and sexually assaults, garrots and bashes her head in. Where is WC FIelds when you need him.
 
It makes no sense.

Rewards? The object of the exercise was to KIDNAP her.... grab the little kid & leave.

You don't spend an extra second in an operation that is not essential... remember we are not dealing with amateurs.... this is a "small foreign faction" for crying out loud.


LI Mom,

It's no use. Logic doesn't apply to people who think the Ramseys are innocent. You could have a video of the crime showing which Ramseys is guilty and it wouldn't matter.

Don't mean to insult the posters. Just their posts are illogical. Makes no sense.

The only thing that logically makes any sense is that it was a family member. In fact, it is a fairly easy case other than trying to figure out who did what that night. But to say it was one of the three inside that night is an easy conclusion. One that is supported by the evidence.
 
I think the ransom note practing writing non kidnapping, non raping or abducting pedophile sex attacking killer was also a psychic.

The intruder must have known in advance that JonBenet liked pineapple! He must have had a vision of it, possibly while writing the ransom note.

OMG I can't really believe anyone seriously believes that an intruder fed this child pineapple and further, was planning to take the pineapple on the road, but then, apparently something went wrong and the kind kidnapper who cared about ensuring the little girl's hydration turns evil and sexually assaults, garrots and bashes her head in. Where is WC FIelds when you need him.

Thats almost as ridiculous as the RDI claims of parents who wrap their victim child up 'lovingly as only a parent would do', after sexually assaulting, garroting, and headbashing them. You're making fun of one of RDI's biggest claims, really, because an intruder can be fickle and suddenly assault and kill instead of kidnap, if they want.

:boohoo:
 
utter foolishness

bank robbers dont rob banks and then open savings account IN THE SAME BANK while heading out the door



you rob the bank and get out


you dont kidnap a child and feed them a snack


NEXT foolishness statememt that needs to be debunked ,,please

:woohoo:
 
Thats almost as ridiculous as the RDI claims of parents who wrap their victim child up 'lovingly as only a parent would do', after sexually assaulting, garroting, and headbashing them. You're making fun of one of RDI's biggest claims, really, because an intruder can be fickle and suddenly assault and kill instead of kidnap, if they want.

:boohoo:

parents do that when they are trying to make it LOOK like someone else did it

:crazy:
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
165
Guests online
827
Total visitors
992

Forum statistics

Threads
625,961
Messages
18,517,040
Members
240,914
Latest member
Jamaise
Back
Top