No intruder?

[Peepers]

Whatever happened..intruder..or no intruder..I dont know but I dont base my opinions on what ST says. I may be in the minority but I dont see him as the fallen martyr he portrays himself to be.

 

[BBB167893]

First of all, HOTYH, I'd prefer you didn't reply within the quote box. It makes it very hard to reply to you.

Dont worry SD you're popularity is safe here in this forum. Comfy even.

HOTYH, don't take this the wrong way, but what the devil are you talking about? When I talked about a poll, it has nothing to do with my "popularity." You said that my claim was crazy. I just thought it might be interesting to find out how many agree with you and how many don't.

I can't tell you how to spend your money.

Don't change the subject.

Like they've been told its going to snow. Those nasty newspeople and weathermen always lying to people.

Laugh it up, my friend. You're more right than you know!

Whats your point?

What's my point?! After years of trying to deny it, you said it yourself: the ex prosecuting attorney WANTS the Rs free and clear. As I've been saying for a while now, that was exactly the PROBLEM! Indeed, that's what ST was trying to tell people, thus the "hero" comment.

 

[madeleine]

Point: When Mary Lacy was the prosecuting attorney she wanted the Ramseys free and clear. That's what you said and SD agrees.
New Point: New prosecuting attorney and I don't think he has as much faith in the Ramseys as ML. He very well could have, but that's yet to be seen

At least she did something,something she personally believed in,do I agree with what she did?NO.But at least she fought for what she believed in,the R's innocence.
What's the new guy doing?

NOTHING!

except using this murder in his campaign which I find disgusting.

 

[joeskidbeck]

At least she did something,something she personally believed in,do I agree with what she did?NO.But at least she fought for what she believed in,the R's innocence.
What's the new guy doing?

NOTHING!

except using this murder in his campaign which I find disgusting.

If he is doing nothing, it is a shame. But how can we know what he is doing? I hope after all these years of misinformation that this man has enough sense to keep what he is doing very close to the vest. Even if he is doing something to further his career, it's better than nothing being done for JonBenet at all. Better than evidence sitting somewhere rotting while her killers live the good life. Whoever they are.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Just because it's not out in the media, doesn't mean he isn't doing anything. We have no way of knowing but solving this case would definitely help his reputation a lot so I don't see why he wouldn't want to solve it.

 

[madeleine]

I've kinda lost my faith......anyway,I hope you guys are right and I am wrong,I really wanna see this moving.But I didn't change my mind,if RDI,they need a confession,they don't have anything to go to court with and it seems LW will never allow the R's to answer questions (good move,btw).So to me it looks like a vicious circle and nothing will change,because it can't change.You can't force them to talk,you got not much on them,what can you do.
MAYBE the miracle would indeed be a DNA match,if it will match one day someone who worked for LE or was present at the autopsy(but ML said everybody was tested) or some factory worker......then they officially have to go back to zero and maybe this would allow them to put a little pressure on the R's and make them talk.

 

[Kaybug]

This is, ofcourse, my opinion only. This case will never be solved. Burke Ramsey isn't talking (if he has anything to talk about) and never will, John Ramsey will never talk (if he has anything to talk about), and Patsy Ramesy is dead (she definitely won't be talking).

Few seem to favor the IDI theory, which will never be proven either, in my opinion.

 

[joeskidbeck]

I've kinda lost my faith......anyway,I hope you guys are right and I am wrong,I really wanna see this moving.But I didn't change my mind,if RDI,they need a confession,they don't have anything to go to court with and it seems LW will never allow the R's to answer questions (good move,btw).So to me it looks like a vicious circle and nothing will change,because it can't change.You can't force them to talk,you got not much on them,what can you do.
MAYBE the miracle would indeed be a DNA match,if it will match one day someone who worked for LE or was present at the autopsy(but ML said everybody was tested) or some factory worker......then they officially have to go back to zero and maybe this would allow them to put a little pressure on the R's and make them talk.

I don't blame you, maddy. It's hard to not lose hope in this case. It's my opinion that there are three people who could have a moment of pure love for JB and tell what they know. JR, BR, and PP. I have very little hope in John Ramsey ever telling anything he knows, but BR being as young as he was may get tired of carrying the family "secret" and let it out after his dad dies. PP, no way, no how, she will never tell anything.

 

[UKGuy]

First of all, HOTYH, I'd prefer you didn't reply within the quote box. It makes it very hard to reply to you.



HOTYH, don't take this the wrong way, but what the devil are you talking about? When I talked about a poll, it has nothing to do with my "popularity." You said that my claim was crazy. I just thought it might be interesting to find out how many agree with you and how many don't.



Don't change the subject.



Laugh it up, my friend. You're more right than you know!



What's my point?! After years of trying to deny it, you said it yourself: the ex prosecuting attorney WANTS the Rs free and clear. As I've been saying for a while now, that was exactly the PROBLEM! Indeed, that's what ST was trying to tell people, thus the "hero" comment.

SuperDave,

That looks like what I read too! The Ramsey's only defense is an IDI, so lets check out the dna issue again, oh we found some touch-dna. Now what can we do with this. Right ok , lets call it DNA and the stuff in the panties genetic material or even stranger DNA. I reckon we can publicly clear you on this ($$$$$), its obviously intruder DNA.

JonBenet's death is a sexually motivated homicide and there is zero forensic evidence linking or matching to anyone outside of the house. Also, to date, there is no repeat for emphasis, no IDI theory that explains any of the forensic evidence at all!


oh! Remember its touch-dna not DNA, there is a difference!


.

 

[UKGuy]

This is, ofcourse, my opinion only. This case will never be solved. Burke Ramsey isn't talking (if he has anything to talk about) and never will, John Ramsey will never talk (if he has anything to talk about), and Patsy Ramesy is dead (she definitely won't be talking).

Few seem to favor the IDI theory, which will never be proven either, in my opinion.

Kaybug,

BPD might have new evidence e.g. touch-dna, found after analysing some of the forensic evidence. Otherwise why bother asking to speak to Burke?

The can we ask a few questions technique e.g. Columbo, is always done to eliminate someone linked forensically.

.

 

[UKGuy]

I've kinda lost my faith......anyway,I hope you guys are right and I am wrong,I really wanna see this moving.But I didn't change my mind,if RDI,they need a confession,they don't have anything to go to court with and it seems LW will never allow the R's to answer questions (good move,btw).So to me it looks like a vicious circle and nothing will change,because it can't change.You can't force them to talk,you got not much on them,what can you do.
MAYBE the miracle would indeed be a DNA match,if it will match one day someone who worked for LE or was present at the autopsy(but ML said everybody was tested) or some factory worker......then they officially have to go back to zero and maybe this would allow them to put a little pressure on the R's and make them talk.

madeleine,
They might decide to charge someone, that would exercise some vocal chords, give the media something to chew on, and force the release of some of the currently sealed forensic evidence.

.

 

[otg]

SuperDave,

That looks like what I read too! The Ramsey's only defense is an IDI, so lets check out the dna issue again, oh we found some touch-dna. Now what can we do with this. Right ok , lets call it DNA and the stuff in the panties genetic material or even stranger DNA. I reckon we can publicly clear you on this ($$$$$), its obviously intruder DNA.

JonBenet's death is a sexually motivated homicide and there is zero forensic evidence linking or matching to anyone outside of the house. Also, to date, there is no repeat for emphasis, no IDI theory that explains any of the forensic evidence at all!


oh! Remember its touch-dna not DNA, there is a difference!

Seems to me that, having run out of suspect prescient intruders here in the the States, the Ramsey ilk, their shills, minions, and toadies have resorted to looking in other countries without being very specific ("wink wink nudge nudge").
.

 

[UKGuy]

Seems to me that, having run out of suspect prescient intruders here in the the States, the Ramsey ilk, their shills, minions, and toadies have resorted to looking in other countries without being very specific ("wink wink nudge nudge").
.

otg,

I agree. Also you reckon the covert sting on Karr conducted incognito by Tracey was motivated by ($$$$$)?

hey John we have a suspect , he is taking about JonBenet, seems he is a pedophile, we have him taped. It might cost some ($$$$) to proceed what you think?


.

 

[otg]

otg,

I agree. Also you reckon the covert sting on Karr conducted incognito by Tracey was motivated by ($$$$$)?

hey John we have a suspect , he is taking about JonBenet, seems he is a pedophile, we have him taped. It might cost some ($$$$) to proceed what you think?

I think Tracey would have done just about anything to insert himself into the case for the sole purpose of self-promotion. Whether that was ultimately for monetary gain or his own self-aggrandizement, I don't know.
.

 

[joeskidbeck]

It was a little of both for Tracey, otg. He certainly wasn't alone in his endeavors. I know of at least one woman that was right up there with him in his charge to clear the Ramseys. I'm surprised these two didn't fall all over each other they tried so hard!

 

[txsvicki]

I think that the new people on the case definitely could solve it if there was an intruder and also if it should turn out that Patsy did it. Burke was raised with Christian values and he just might talk. He also might remember a lot that could lead to someone else. Patsy left the kids with housekeepers, nannies, and friends so any of them could have an acquaintance who end up matching the dna. I really believe it can be solved because whoever pulled it off was not that smart and it does seem to be an "inside job" just like John said. Hopefully they'll go back up to a year before JonBenet was murdered and thoroughly look at everything and everyone with fresh eyes instead of being influenced by former opinions and suspicions.

 

[UKGuy]

I think that the new people on the case definitely could solve it if there was an intruder and also if it should turn out that Patsy did it. Burke was raised with Christian values and he just might talk. He also might remember a lot that could lead to someone else. Patsy left the kids with housekeepers, nannies, and friends so any of them could have an acquaintance who end up matching the dna. I really believe it can be solved because whoever pulled it off was not that smart and it does seem to be an "inside job" just like John said. Hopefully they'll go back up to a year before JonBenet was murdered and thoroughly look at everything and everyone with fresh eyes instead of being influenced by former opinions and suspicions.

txsvicki,

Unless the forensic evidence is sealed into perpetuity, then I reckon it will eventually be solved. It might be too many people with positions to consider, would prefer it to become solved once John Ramsey has become deceased?

Also everytime there is some media report about JonBenet, I'll bet Burke and John are busy checking the forums to see if anyone has found the truth?

.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

:laugh:

I just thought it might be interesting to find out how many agree with you and how many don't.

"I just thought it might be interesting..."

What a joke remark, on a forum that is 10:1 RDI.

 

[SunnieRN]

txsvicki,

Unless the forensic evidence is sealed into perpetuity, then I reckon it will eventually be solved. It might be too many people with positions to consider, would prefer it to become solved once John Ramsey has become deceased?

Also everytime there is some media report about JonBenet, I'll bet Burke and John are busy checking the forums to see if anyone has found the truth?

.

TxsVicki,

I would hope and pray this case will never be solved by touch DNA. The implications to that are that anyone a murder victim has contact with, in any way is suspect of that murder.

I go to a 7/11. I push the door handle, go to the milk case, take out a 1/2 gallon, touching that door. I go to the counter, to pay, pick up a pack of gum, decide not to get it, put it down. I pick up one of those fake roses in the hard plastic, decide not to buy it, put it down. You get the picture.

Two hours after I leave the store, there is a murder. A crazed woman with a gun, kills the clerk. She is my height, my coloring. The police, in order to solve the crime, as the security cameras were broken, look for fingerprints and find touch DNA.

Yes, I was at the scene, two hours earlier, as were many other people before and since. Are all women who were in that store now suspects? If it is a large city, that could be hundreds, perhaps thousands of leads. Should this case stall and not be solved due to touch DNA? The implications here are MUCH scarier than 'big brother'.

The case has to be solved by the evidence, both physical and circumstantial. If there are witnesses, they must be interviewed. Touch DNA is worthless, unless it is found on a smoking gun and then, only if there is gun powder on the perps hands, if found soon after the fact.

Touch DNA is not the evidence that will prosecute or solve cases. There are too many variables and too many loopholes. Remember six degrees of separation?

Are there situations in which it could be used and useful? I'm sure there are, but not as the only evidence. There will have to be much more evidence.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

TxsVicki,

I would hope and pray this case will never be solved by touch DNA. The implications to that are that anyone a murder victim has contact with, in any way is suspect of that murder.

I go to a 7/11. I push the door handle, go to the milk case, take out a 1/2 gallon, touching that door. I go to the counter, to pay, pick up a pack of gum, decide not to get it, put it down. I pick up one of those fake roses in the hard plastic, decide not to buy it, put it down. You get the picture.

Two hours after I leave the store, there is a murder. A crazed woman with a gun, kills the clerk. She is my height, my coloring. The police, in order to solve the crime, as the security cameras were broken, look for fingerprints and find touch DNA.

Yes, I was at the scene, two hours earlier, as were many other people before and since. Are all women who were in that store now suspects? If it is a large city, that could be hundreds, perhaps thousands of leads. Should this case stall and not be solved due to touch DNA? The implications here are MUCH scarier than 'big brother'.

The case has to be solved by the evidence, both physical and circumstantial. If there are witnesses, they must be interviewed. Touch DNA is worthless, unless it is found on a smoking gun and then, only if there is gun powder on the perps hands, if found soon after the fact.

Touch DNA is not the evidence that will prosecute or solve cases. There are too many variables and too many loopholes. Remember six degrees of separation?

Are there situations in which it could be used and useful? I'm sure there are, but not as the only evidence. There will have to be much more evidence.

The touch DNA on the leggings matched the DNA that was found in solution with JBR's blood taken up from a swab that was pressed onto red stained area of underwear fabric, for the expressed purpose of finding assailant DNA. Sure enough, there it was.

Since when is a jug of milk on the same criminal context as inside crotch underwear of a sexual assault victim? Do you really think JBR's underwear is a convenience store item?

Do you even read your own posts?