Mr. Clean v. The State and The Tabloids

[Toth]

>Statistically - the parents were the most likely to have killed JonBenet
No.

>The FACT remains that the Ramseys did NOT sit down with police and
>enable the police to clear them for 4 months
You mean the fact remains that the BPD did not allow the Ramseys to sit down with them for four months.
And I'm sure you meant "interview them'' rather than 'clear them'.

>Do you think the police should not have seen anything suspicious in the
>Ramseys evasive behaviour in sitting down with Police?
The Ramseys were not in any way evasive.

 

[Imon128]

NOTHING that the Ramseys have said or done indicates any sort of "foregiveness"; they want the case solved!

JAR, as one example, has said "forgiveness" and the R's could have done so much more to promote the wanting of the case solved. It is, after all, up to LE to solve the case. The R's have balked them nearly all the way. Now they have Linny Wood to help them stall a true investigation. Some of us are not fooled.

 

[Toth]

Exactly Toth, the paintbrush was more suitable. Why would he care what was suitable for her size?

No. You have missed the drift of my earlier comments. I do not want to get too explicit here as I do try to avoid any "x-rated" posts but to phrase it more plainly for you let me state that in using the paint brush he selected the item that was larger.

 

[Toth]

It seems this perp left no forensic evidence either way.

He left some under her fingernails and in her panties. He also left some fibers that are unique to the area wherein she died. He may have left a footprint and he may have left a palm print also.

 

[Barbara]

No. You have missed the drift of my earlier comments. I do not want to get too explicit here as I do try to avoid any "x-rated" posts but to phrase it more plainly for you let me state that in using the paint brush he selected the item that was larger.

No, I didn't miss your drift. I too, wouldn't get that explicit but the "larger paint brush" is not what I had in mind. Why not go larger? It took an autopsy to show that she had even been violated THERE. Why not make it more obvious to the parents upon discovering her?

WHAT ABOUT THE PINEAPPLE? (do you have a requirement for the number of times asked before your respond or should I assume that you are not going to respond to that part of the crime scenario)

 

[Toth]

No, the risk ISN'T gone after that entry. Sorry. JMO

Why not? If the cops don't show up right away, they ain't ever gonna show up!

 

[K777angel]

Nope. If he saw them all leave and then enters, his "risk" is in the first ten minutes. If no cops by then, he is home free. Once he hides under the bed in the JAR/Guestroom and waits for house to be still, he need only be quiet and keep her quiet until he has that basement door closed behind him. After that, there was no risk. He could use the stun gun in the basement, tell her 'Your Daddy is not going to rescue you" and "There is no Heaven" and the like, do things to her, gleefully hear her sobs and he knew that no one would hear anything. Then the garotte with one foot on her holding her down he pulls the paintbrush handle slowly,,, then he makes sure with a really good blow to the head. He even hits her on the side where his siezures take place! And then he calmly hides the body, leaves the note and disappears into the night.

Good grief! So you really think this dude, after doing all these things to JonBenet (and you conveniently left out how he wiped her off, pulled her pants back up and then carefully wrapped her up in a blankie - not to mention taking the care to PLACE her on a blankie on the floor in that room)
... so then he runs BACK upstairs to the main floor and carefully lays out those 3 pages of the letter on the stairs???? Taking the incredible risk that he is going to get CAUGHT? LOL!!! Keep going... this is entertaining.

Oh - and just HOW did this "intruder" even KNOW the Ramsey family was going out anywhere that night??? And that their dog would not be home?
And that they would return? And if he "planned" this entry into their home after such inside knowledge that they would be leaving for the evening - why was he so careless as to not bring the most important element WITH him?
The ransom note.
Think about it. You claim this guy "hid" somewhere (where?) watching the house to see them leave. HOW did he KNOW they were going to leave???
And HOW did he KNOW they would be gone for a few hours??
In your theory, he would HAVE to know this for it to fit. Otherwise, the Ramseys may have just been driving somewhere for 15 minutes and would be right back home. What then? No time to write the letter. No safe place to hide. While he may have been watching to SEE if the Ramseys might leave that night - he would have to KNOW they were leaving for a long enough period of time in order to even make the effort to go there in the first place planning to do what was done.
Of course "he" didn't know any such thing. There is no "he" that entered that home.

Regarding the latch on the basement door where JonBenet was found - Officer French who was the first officer to search the house that morning, SAW that door and that it was latched and decided NOT to open it. Much to his continued dismay at that decision.
So it was latched from the beginning. Again - another mark against the long list of why no intruder killed JonBenet.

 

[Toth]

JAR, as one example, has said "forgiveness" and the R's could have done so much more to promote the wanting of the case solved. It is, after all, up to LE to solve the case. The R's have balked them nearly all the way. Now they have Linny Wood to help them stall a true investigation. Some of us are not fooled.

No JAR has been oft-quoted as having said forgiveness, but he never said it and I don't think he ever thought it and rather doubt he ever will say it.
The Ramseys insisted their lawyers arrange a meeting with the BPD despite their lawyers repeated advice against it. The Ramsey have repeatedly tried to get investigators on the case and a better trained police agency involved. Lin Wood was able to apply a degree of 'leverage' in that DA-Keenan could eithe wade through all those files in defending against a civil rights action or she could wade through all those files in conducting a new investigation. The Ramseys preferred that the case be investigated rather than that Lin Wood file the civil rights action against Boulder for damages.

 

[Toth]

Yes, it was latched at the beginning, but I fail to see how that is any sort of 'mark against the intruder theory'. Its a mark against Officer Donut, thats for sure!

I rather doubt that an entire family heading out at holiday time would be going on a fifteen minute trip to the local convenience store and returning promptly.

He was hiding in his rental car parked in the alley but drove to a block or so away once he saw them leave and walked to the house.

 

[Ivy]

Originally posted by Toth
JAR has been oft-quoted as having said forgiveness, but he never said it and I don't think he ever thought it and rather doubt he ever will say it.

Well, if it wasn't JAR, then who is the guy identified as JAR that the police videotaped saying he thought the proper punishment for JonBenet's killer should be forgiveness?

 

[Imon128]

Read Steve's book for JAR's comments about this.

 

[K777angel]

No JAR has been oft-quoted as having said forgiveness, but he never said it and I don't think he ever thought it and rather doubt he ever will say it.
The Ramseys insisted their lawyers arrange a meeting with the BPD despite their lawyers repeated advice against it. The Ramsey have repeatedly tried to get investigators on the case and a better trained police agency involved. Lin Wood was able to apply a degree of 'leverage' in that DA-Keenan could eithe wade through all those files in defending against a civil rights action or she could wade through all those files in conducting a new investigation. The Ramseys preferred that the case be investigated rather than that Lin Wood file the civil rights action against Boulder for damages.

I love how you use the antispetic sounding word "leverage" instead of the more appropriate BLACKMAIL used by Lin Wood against Keenan and Boulder DA's office. LOL! Talk about verbal engineering.....

If Keenan TRULY thought there was anything of value left to investigate in the murder she would have done so long ago WITHOUT the bully threats of some slimely CIVIL lawyer who is being paid to revamp the Ramseys reputation. Which he'll never be able to do.
The public knows this is nothing but window dressing on the DA's part in order to prevent an annoying lawsuit by Mr. Sue Em'.

The DA's office and the Boulder police know who killed JonBenet. No amount of public announcements from the #1 suspects civil lawyer is going to change that or change the public perception. Because they cannot PROVE it - does not mean the Ramseys are innocent.
The Ramseys have NEVER been declared as being removed from under that umbrella of suspicion. NEVER. And until they are - Lin Wood can continue to try every bully tactic and manipulative angle he can think of - but it won't change the fact that the Ramseys are still SUSPECTS.
Still.

Until they fold up that umbrella......

 

[Toth]

Read Steve's book for JAR's comments about this.

No, read Steve Thomas's book for what Steve Thomas claims is JAR's comments about forgiveness and claims was videotaped.
He has not produced any notes or videotapes or anything.

 

[Shylock]

He has not produced any notes or videotapes or anything.

Has JAR produced any notes or video tapes to refute Thomas' claim?
(Just an example of how stupid logic can work both ways...)

 

[TLynn]

Nope. If he saw them all leave and then enters, his "risk" is in the first ten minutes. If no cops by then, he is home free. Once he hides under the bed in the JAR/Guestroom and waits for house to be still, he need only be quiet and keep her quiet until he has that basement door closed behind him. After that, there was no risk. He could use the stun gun in the basement, tell her 'Your Daddy is not going to rescue you" and "There is no Heaven" and the like, do things to her, gleefully hear her sobs and he knew that no one would hear anything. Then the garotte with one foot on her holding her down he pulls the paintbrush handle slowly,,, then he makes sure with a really good blow to the head. He even hits her on the side where his siezures take place! And then he calmly hides the body, leaves the note and disappears into the night.

And she ate the pineapple when...?!

 

[Barbara]

And she ate the pineapple when...?!

And the answer is....

Toth has taken it upon himself to just discount the pineapple. I'm not quite sure exactly what that means, but after the lack of response, I went over to his forum and lo and behold, on one thread, Toth has explained that he just dismisses and discounts it!

Voila! If it doesn't fit with the theory, we can just dismiss it!

It's almost amusing. The pineapple is one of the very few things about this case that is scientific, documented and not argued by the RST, but Toth has decided to dismiss this very important detail.

How can you do that Toth? How can you dismiss a crucial, SUBSTANTIATED piece of evidence and then turn around and try to make a valid argument for your theory? That would be akin to us deciding that we dismiss the head blow as non existent.

If we can dismiss the documented and legitimized evidence from LE when mulling this case over, then we could collectively come up with a million theories!

Can you explain? Do you dismiss it as non existent? Do you dismiss it as non- crime related? Do you dismiss it as a plant by the BPD or do you just think the coroner made it all up? Clarification please

 

[sissi]

Let's pretend she ate the pineapple at home before her murder. At minimum two hours elapsed between eating the pineapple and the murder.
Can we develop a scenario around the pineapple?
A person known to her,entered the house with a furry animal (she had fur in her hands) and they sat at the table eating pineapple playing with the bunny or whatever,before he stood and stunned her. He then dragged her to the basement,tried to place her in the suitcase to carry her out,but she fought him,he stunned her again,and again she regained enough "oomph" to fight him. He then stunned her again,tied her hands,probably stuffed a rag in her mouth,garotted her ,tortured her with the paintbrush,then thinking she was dead,kicked her in the head with a steel toed boot. He had come to kidnap her,lure her,but she was an unwilling victim,and he,drunk or high "lost it". They never found the source of the ink on her hand,they never found the piece of paintbrush used to molest her,nor the cord nor tape. They don't know the source for the fur or the fibers. No parent would "half clean up" this crime scene.
IMO JMO

 

[Ivy]

sissi, do you really think anyone would have the gall to do what you described, knowing the rest of the family was upstairs and might hear? I don't. Anyway, if someone did do those things, don't you think one of the three remaining Ramseys would have heard and come to investigate?

The "fur" in JB's palm was only a few hairs, wasn't it? And it wasn't found anywhere but on her palm, as I recall. If she had been holding, or even just petting, a rabbit or other animal, I'd think its hairs would have been found on more places than just her palm. Maybe the hairs came from an art brush. Various kinds of animal hairs are used in art brush bristles, including beaver and camel.

 

[TLynn]

You can't dismiss a KEY piece of HARD evidence and have any credibility.

JonBenet is speaking to you. This little victim is telling you something - she's giving you evidence - how can it possibly be ignored.

Thank you, Sissi - but it's extremely difficult to believe an intruder would bring fresh pineapple and a live animal. Unless the pineapple was to feed the animal...

 

[Toth]

Has JAR produced any notes or video tapes to refute Thomas' claim?
(Just an example of how stupid logic can work both ways...)

A videotape of his not being interviewed? Or a police videotape which he does not have any possession of or control over?
As you said: stupid logic.