Medical review of Jonbenet case

[LinasK]

There's DNA from someone who wasn't a Ramsey found on JonBenet - from two different sources, on two different garments of different age and origin. No one has ever given a credible explanation for this. And until someone does, an intruder remains to he most likely.

Are you talking actually on JB or the touch DNA found in her underwear that was thought to have come from the manufacturer?

 

[FergusMcDuck]

Are you talking actually on JB or the touch DNA found in her underwear that was thought to have come from the manufacturer?

The DNA in her underwear wasn't touch DNA, it was from a bodily fluid and that it was from a manufacturer was speculation without evidence - and with the discovery of the matching touch DNA on her longjohns, the idea that it was a manufacturer becomes essentially impossible.

 

[LinasK]

The DNA in her underwear wasn't touch DNA, it was from a bodily fluid and that it was from a manufacturer was speculation without evidence - and with the discovery of the matching touch DNA on her longjohns, the idea that it was a manufacturer becomes essentially impossible.

I haven't heard that semen was found in her underwear. What's your source? That still doesn't rule out John or Burke unless they've compared their DNA.

 

[INfisherman]

Bodily fluid isn’t only semen. Saliva, blood, urine, mucous, tear drops, sweat, etc.

 

[LinasK]

Bodily fluid isn’t only semen. Saliva, blood, urine, mucous, tear drops, sweat, etc.

In her underwear, it's a safe bet that it was semen, but you are correct. Either way, if it was preserved correctly, DNA testing can now be done on it. John and Burke are both still alive to give samples. If they are innocent, I'd think they'd be clamoring to give their DNA.

 

[INfisherman]

In her underwear, it's a safe bet that it was semen, but you are correct. Either way, if it was preserved correctly, DNA testing can now be done on it. John and Burke are both still alive to give samples. If they are innocent, I'd think they'd be clamoring to give their DNA.

I’m not disputing anything - most of what I’ve read more recently on this site has been saliva related. Please don’t take that as fact though, as I’m not a die hard follower. Many theories & entire case is just a mess & quite bizarre IMO.

 

[FergusMcDuck]

In her underwear, it's a safe bet that it was semen, but you are correct. Either way, if it was preserved correctly, DNA testing can now be done on it. John and Burke are both still alive to give samples. If they are innocent, I'd think they'd be clamoring to give their DNA.

Burke and John gave DNA back in 1996, so the police have always had it. And the DNA mixed with JonBenet's blood doesn't belong to either of them.

 

[LinasK]

I just finished watching the two-hour 20/20 ABC special on the case. I have to say that I was very unimpressed by it. It was heavily biased towards the Ramseys and Lou Smit (who lost all objectivity in my eyes when he prayed with them). There was no new evidence presented. It was just a rehashing of everything that we already knew- plus some new interview footage of Patsy & John. The Grand Jury felt that there was enough evidence to indict them. I still believe that John sexually abused JB and killed her and that Patsy wrote the ransom note.

 

[Johnny Joe Dillinger]

Would it be reasonable to assume the police checked everyone at the company where he worked, including terminated employees that might have had a grudge? The note just throws me back and forth on this case. It makes no sense. Did they plan to take her and then got to the basement and decided they couldn't get thru the window with her and then abuse her? Obviously the motive was abuse, the note must be a red herring, but to what end?

 

[Jink3]

Would it be reasonable to assume the police checked everyone at the company where he worked, including terminated employees that might have had a grudge? The note just throws me back and forth on this case. It makes no sense. Did they plan to take her and then got to the basement and decided they couldn't get thru the window with her and then abuse her? Obviously the motive was abuse, the note must be a red herring, but to what end?

The ransom note only throws you off if you’re trying to read too deeply into it. In reality, the note is very basic and amateurish, drawing clear inspiration from movies and screenplays, and it’s riddled with random exclamations, strange phrases, and even compliments. Experts, including renowned handwriting analyst Cina Wong, concluded that Patsy Ramsey was the most likely author of the note, citing strong similarities in writing style, phrasing, and letter formations. Additional evidence, such as the fact that the note was written on Patsy’s notepad with a pen from the house and that earlier drafts were found, reinforces that the note was staged. All of this aligns with the fact that there was no intruder.

The motive was certainly not abuse, as JonBenét wasn’t actually abused that night in the traditional sense. The evidence shows she was struck in the head once and then, 45 minutes to 2 hours later, “strangled” just enough to cut off oxygen to her brain to cause death (which was a much lower threshold due to the brain swelling) but not hard enough to cause internal damage to her windpipe. I will always be convinced that this staged “strangulation” was part of the attempt to cover up whatever had happened that night (and likely to hide the evidence of previous SA) and not a continuation of abuse. The note was simply another layer of the staging, designed to mislead investigators.

 

[CloudedTruth]

Also, I don’t think the ransom note “attempts to make John look like a good guy”, nor reflects love, affection, admiration, or any positive feelings about him. I think it evinces disdain toward him. And I think that person who holds JR in disdain, and who wrote the “War and Peace of ransom notes”, is none other than PR.

MOO.

IMO, the note reflects someone with mixed emotions towards John. Anger and a certain amount of disdain, for sure. But also referring to his good common sense (complimentary?), and then the almost motherly (or wifely) advice of being well rested which indicates care. And I do agree that person was Patsy.

 

[LinasK]

Okay, so the 48 Hours program on JB's death was about the same as the 20/20 show. No "new" information, mostly replaying their 2002 program of it. Although they actually DID point out Lou Smit praying with the Ramseys and quitting the case. If anything, the fiber evidence reminded me more than I believe that John sexually assaulted and killed her, and Patsy helped him with the coverup and wrote the ransom note. Also, why couldn't John have owned a stun gun? I'm more convinced than ever that it was an RDI.

 

[crb73]

I don't know who killed JonBenet. I am a medical professional so I'll give professional input on facts.
1. A stun gun does NOT cause immediate unconsciousness...I've been struck with a stun gun as a medical experiment-- I SCREAMED. It causes cellular disruption via chemical reactions. It will knock you off of your feet, BUT it is painful and you will scream. it does NOT cause paralysis or unconsciousness.
2. The TINY amount of DNA in the underwear is consistent with a sneeze/cough/loud speech of someone...including someone manufacturing it. NOT sexual assault. Sexual assault leads to millions of cells deposited--not tens of cells.
3. Much debate has been made as to who murdered her. (Mom/Dad/Burke/Stranger. This is not complete...A stranger could have killed her, BUT Mom and Dad could have quickly thought Burke did it...Once believing that their son was NOT involved, their cover-up via fake note and made-up facts could have been not needed.
4. Pediatricians do NOT commonly do vaginal exams on pre-pubescent girls. IF she had chronic vaginitis (inflammation) then sexual assault or chronic bed-wetting would be suspected. Any pediatrician who delt with a female with chronic vaginitis who denied that sexual abuse would be possible, would be covering up. One must ALWAYS have sexual abuse as a possible cause of chronic vaginitis...
5. Many "suspicious" things that Burke said are consistent with a 9-year-old child. He can not be expected to have given precise times, or events. Burke may have played a part in the incident, but his contradictions, actions, and affect after the murder cannot be used as evidence of guilt. It MAY be that parents THOUGHT that he was guilty...
6. The ransom note attempts to make John look like a good guy, and has many commands such as "rest" that point to someone who loves John. No matter who killed her, the note was written by someone who loved John Ramsey.
7. Spiderwebs DON'T lie...There was evidence that nobody entered or exited the "broken window" due to an intact spiderweb in the frame. No human could enter/exit that window without breaking the web. Also, there were months worth of pine needles on top of the metal grate...it wasn't opened before the murder.
8. 30 years later, John is still actively pushing to find the killer...he believes that a non-family member killed his daughter. This doesn't mean that he didn't initially think it was Patsy/Burke, but it means that quickly he realized that it probably wasn't. There were secretes in the family...Burke most of all...but in the end, John realized that he blamed his son without probable cause...

<ADMIN NOTE: Above is all member opinion in lieu of them being WS Verified >

What is your theory then? If there's no way an intruder enter through the window.... only 3 purple eye in the house with jbr.

 

[Zapoleon]

I have always thought patsy was the one more involved but Johns movements the morning she went missing checking the basement the first time and finding nothing then going off finding her the second time just raises questions.

In his interviews though since her death I have never really felt John was lying much. Pasty on the other hand i am not so sure.

 

[Tricia]

*No More Advertisements
*Faster Server
*Amazing True Crime Discussions
Websleuths.com is getting better and better!
In return, if you could please help the families of the missing get the answers they deserve by becoming a subscriber to DNA Solves.com
By making a monthly donation to DNA Solves, you will personally be helping the families of the missing. You will be making a difference in their lives.
If you enjoy Websleuths, please, if possible, become a monthly subscriber to DNA Solves.com
We completely understand if you can't donate to DNA Solves at the moment. So, if you could please pass along the DNA Solves link on your social media and help get the word out about their great work, that would be wonderful.
Please post any questions HERE.
Thank you,
Tricia

 

[CloudedTruth]

I have always thought patsy was the one more involved but Johns movements the morning she went missing checking the basement the first time and finding nothing then going off finding her the second time just raises questions.

In his interviews though since her death I have never really felt John was lying much. Pasty on the other hand i am not so sure.

It may seem as if JR isn't lying because he's so adept at it. He has lied so often in interviews it's hard to keep track.

Just recently he told an interviewer that the hand prints on the door to the WC have never been identified. LIE.
He has said countless times that the BPD focused solely on the Ramseys and no one else. LIE.
He has said the BPD refused all help from other agencies. LIE.

The list of lies he has told and continues to tell is a very long one.

 

[Zapoleon]

yeah maybe John is just a more convincing liar, given he owned a company and that he does come across as having an air of authority and charm about him.