JBR, PR and UMI

[DeeDee249]

Yes but not in a bad way.

I now know - the tape on JBRs mouth wasn't properly tested (so no PR fibers would have been found); the tape was torn not cut with a knife (SWK or any other); RDI use out of context and incomplete sentences uttered by investigators as evidence; some of the most important physical evidence (RN and garotte) was destroyed during earlier testing; the wet bed that RDI use as evidence that PDI, may or may not have ever happened; expert assessment of the RN and that PR was the author wasn't even believed by the investigators.

Yep, I think we've gotten somewhere here.

Patsy's fibers WERE found on the tape.
The bed was never reported as "wet". What LW is trying to confuse here is to get out of his interviewee that the bed was WET. Because the sheets were not removed right away, by the time they were collected they were dry (but stained and smelled of urine). No one who investigated the house reported a wet bed. There WAS creatinine (dried urine) on her sheets. It was not possible to tell when that was left, however. If JB never made it into her bed that night, the urine stains could have been from the night before.

 

[DeeDee249]

The garrote WAS tested.
I posted a link to a statement a while ago.I will try to find it again.

But not for Touch DNA. This method is recent. The garrote was tested back in 1996/97. Patsy's fibers were found in the knot at the back of JB's neck in the testing done back then.

 

[DeeDee249]

"Her parents were not homicidal maniacs after all..."


What type of homicidal parents were they?

The "accidental homicidal" kind.

 

[BBB167893]

Yes but not in a bad way.

That's a matter of opinion.

RDI use out of context and incomplete sentences uttered by investigators as evidence;

???

expert assessment of the RN and that PR was the author wasn't even believed by the investigators.

I don't know about that. I think you mean that there was a question as to whether or not it would be admissable in court.

 

[MurriFlower]

Patsy's fibers WERE found on the tape.

Please post the source of this.

 

[MurriFlower]

???


I don't know about that. I think you mean that there was a question as to whether or not it would be admissable in court.

"HUNTER: Well, I think that's close, but I think that this is a mumbo jumbo area, and we saw Judge Matsch in the McVeigh case, you know, not allow this handwriting stuff in. And I think it is stuff. "

In answer to ??? using a quote where the answer to the question was "Well, I think that's close," rather that the complete sentence above which means something quite different.

Mumbo jumbo area and handwriting stuff, I think this is stuff sounds like someone who doesn't believe to me.

 

[DeeDee249]

Please post the source of this.

Oh brother.

I'm tired of going over this. I spent MONTHS reading all the depositions, so I won't share homework anymore. It's been discussed here for years.
It's in the depos. Feel free to find it. LW prevented his client from answering any question relating to her jacket fibers. I suggest you read it. It's very interesting.

 

[MurriFlower]

Oh brother.

I'm tired of going over this. I spent MONTHS reading all the depositions, so I won't share homework anymore. It's been discussed here for years.
It's in the depos. Feel free to find it. LW prevented his client from answering any question relating to her jacket fibers. I suggest you read it. It's very interesting.

Yeah, tedious eh?

" IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION

ROBERT CHRISTIAN WOLF,
Plaintiff,

v.

JOHN BENNET RAMSEY and
PATRICIA PAUGH RAMSEY,
Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION NO 1:00-CV-1187-JEC

Brown cotton fibers on JonBenet's body, the paintbrush, the duct
tape and on the ligature were not sourced and do not match anything in the Ramsey home.
(SMF 181; PSMF 181. )


So, the black fibres you referred to as being from PR's jacket were found where?

 

[BBB167893]

In answer to ??? using a quote where the answer to the question was "Well, I think that's close," rather that the complete sentence above which means something quite different.

Right, but I didn't do that. At least, I don't think I did.

Mumbo jumbo area and handwriting stuff, I think this is stuff sounds like someone who doesn't believe to me.

Possibly. But the fact that he wanted the jury to make up their own minds suggests much.

 

[WHITEFANG]

"expert witnesses" play an important role in our judicial system. determining the source of a handwriting sample can/has confounded the best and the brightest in that field.

 

[WHITEFANG]

The "accidental homicidal" kind.

Patsy was innocent of premeditated murder.

I agree. We agree!

 

[madeleine]

Please post the source of this.

The fibers are not a MATCH,they're "consistent with" ......add to this that PW owned an identical jacket..........


What I don't understand is,RDI's claim that the DNA ended up there innocently by transfer....but this can't be possible when it comes to the fibers?Let's say those fibers ARE a match with Patsy's jacket(they're NOT but for the sake of argument).If RDI's claim that Patsy's fibers at the crime scene prove she was involved then they must agree (applying the same line of thinking) that the DNA found at the crime scene proves an unknown male was there as well.

 

[MurriFlower]

The fibers are not a MATCH,they're "consistent with" ......add to this that PW owned an identical jacket..........


What I don't understand is,RDI's claim that the DNA ended up there innocently by transfer....but this can't be possible when it comes to the fibers?Let's say those fibers ARE a match with Patsy's jacket(they're NOT but for the sake of argument).If RDI's claim that Patsy's fibers at the crime scene prove she was involved then they must agree (applying the same line of thinking) that the DNA found at the crime scene proves an unknown male was there as well.

The PR jacket is red/black/grey wool/microfibre or the like and the fibres found were brown cotton. Can't see how they could be confused. PWs was similar but not identical bought at a different store and I believe it may have been a different brand.

I'm beginning to believe that RDI says whatever they like.

 

[BBB167893]

The fibers are not a MATCH,they're "consistent with"

Same thing.

......add to this that PW owned an identical jacket..........

I'm not so sure about that. This is from PR's interview with Tom Haney:

PR: Priscilla White had a jacket like this.

TD: Did you buy them at the same time and place?

PR: No, I mean, I don't know. I really don't remember.

Sounds to me like she was throwing out things to muddy the water, as usual. Ultimately, it doesn't matter. The fibers did not come from the jacket. They came from the sweater.

What I don't understand is,RDI's claim that the DNA ended up there innocently by transfer....but this can't be possible when it comes to the fibers?

Not when coupled with everything else. We've got PR on tape confirming that they were hers in a story that conflicts with JR's prior statements. We've also got Lou Smit admitting that the fibers are incriminating.

If RDI's claim that Patsy's fibers at the crime scene prove she was involved then they must agree (applying the same line of thinking) that the DNA found at the crime scene proves an unknown male was there as well.

Not so, for a couple of reasons. Even leaving aside the issues over which one is more likely to transfer innocently, there are still a few big problems:

1) PR's own story just digs her deeper.

2) No one can prove that there was anyone else in the house that night, as yet. That's not true with PR. We KNOW she was there that night. We also know that she wore the same outfit that morning as from the night before, which several people have said she was not known to do.

 

[BBB167893]

The PR jacket is red/black/grey wool/microfibre or the like and the fibres found were brown cotton. Can't see how they could be confused.

They weren't confused for the brown fibers. For one thing, if you're using that court ruling as a basis for anything, you're in for a disappointment, since only one side got to present its case. Michael Kane and Bruce Levin made the red sweater fibers known in August of 2000:

MR. LEVIN: "I think that is probably fair. Based on the state of the art scientific testing, we believe the fibers from her jacket were found in the paint tray, were found tied into the ligature found on JonBenet's neck, were found on the blanket that she is wrapped in, were found on the duct tape that is found on the mouth, and the question is, can she explain to us how those fibers appeared in those places that are associated with her daughter's death. And I understand you are not going to answer those."

Sadly, the interviewer misspoke. He mistakenly referred to the sweater as a jacket. That's not surprising, considering the general ignorance that men have about women's fashion. But PR (in a very likely slip-up) used the word "sweater" herself.

PWs was similar but not identical bought at a different store and I believe it may have been a different brand.

Thanks.

I'm beginning to believe that RDI says whatever they like.

I'll ignore that.

 

[madeleine]

2) No one can prove that there was anyone else in the house that night, as yet.

I guess it's a matter of how you read the evidence.Someone wrote the note and someone left DNA there.

You will say that PR wrote the note and that the DNA is not related to the crime.
But I (or anyone else) could say we DON'T KNOW who left the note and the DNA at the crime scene which can be seen as evidence that someone else WAS in the house that night.

 

[madeleine]

If I understood correctly (pls correct me if I am wrong,I read a lot lately and there are too many things on my mind right now) the experts who stated that PR wrote the note were hired for the C.Wolf trial,right?

 

[BOESP]

"Consistent with" in forensic fiber analysis means the fibers are physically and chemically identical to the fibers in the garment in question BUT, the fibers can not positively be linked to that particular garment, i.e. the garment Patsy wore. There were probably hundreds of identical garments distributed in the United States for which some might have identical fibers, thus the use of the words "consistent with."

What are the chances someone with a garment having fibers consistent with the ones from Patsy's garment being found on JonBenet and it not be from Patsy's garment?

 

[MurriFlower]

They weren't confused for the brown fibers. For one thing, if you're using that court ruling as a basis for anything, you're in for a disappointment, since only one side got to present its case. Michael Kane and Bruce Levin made the red sweater fibers known in August of 2000:

MR. LEVIN: "I think that is probably fair. Based on the state of the art scientific testing, we believe the fibers from her jacket were found in the paint tray, were found tied into the ligature found on JonBenet's neck, were found on the blanket that she is wrapped in, were found on the duct tape that is found on the mouth, and the question is, can she explain to us how those fibers appeared in those places that are associated with her daughter's death. And I understand you are not going to answer those."

Sadly, the interviewer misspoke. He mistakenly referred to the sweater as a jacket. That's not surprising, considering the general ignorance that men have about women's fashion. But PR (in a very likely slip-up) used the word "sweater" herself.

So, SD you reckon that something presented in court as evidence is not true because there was 'only one side of the evidence presented'. However, a statement made by one of the investigators in the case, not backed up by anything other than what they 'believe' is truth.

Then he goes on to say 'and the question is, can she explain to us how those fibers appeared in those places that are associated with her daughter's death.' And I expect her lawyers first question would be 'now please show us the evidence where these fibres were matched to PR's sweater/jacket'

So, can you show me this SD?

 

[DeeDee249]

Yeah, tedious eh?

" IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION

ROBERT CHRISTIAN WOLF,
Plaintiff,

v.

JOHN BENNET RAMSEY and
PATRICIA PAUGH RAMSEY,
Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION NO 1:00-CV-1187-JEC

Brown cotton fibers on JonBenet's body, the paintbrush, the duct
tape and on the ligature were not sourced and do not match anything in the Ramsey home.
(SMF 181; PSMF 181. )


So, the black fibres you referred to as being from PR's jacket were found where?

Not the brown or black fibers. It was red fibers that were found in the paint tote, garrote knot and inside the tape. The interview where LE tells Patsy in the presence of LW that fibers from her sweater/jacker were found in the paint tray, the tape and knot of the garrote can be found in the 2000 interview with Patsy listed in the archives on ACR. It is pretty far down near the bottom.