Why I will never believe any IDI did it theory

[Slebby]

Finally, JR has been pushing for decades to have the DNA tested with better technology. A guilty person is unlikely to do that.

Snipped to focus on this point- dna

In my opinion - I think JR knows the best defence is a good offense. He knows it looks good for him to push for dna testing. I believe he knows, if the testing ever happens, it will not provide any evidence against any Rs.

Let’s say there is testing. What are the possible outcomes?

1. Nothing - sample too small. But it looks good that JR pushed for it!
2. Something - a dna profile.
2A. A dna profile match to an R - J, P, or B. No problem. They lived in the same home, they coughed, breathed, peed, hugged, touched in the same home. A defence team could drive a truck thru reasonable doubt, so JR is not worried about this finding.
2B. A dna profile match to someone known, ie in the codis system. Doubtful, unless you believe they would be motivated to write the RN. To what end? So I don’t see this happening. I doubt JR believes some sex offender wrote that RN either.
2C. A dna profile match to someone known/not in codis such as friend or someone in circle of friends. They will also have to have no alibi. They would also be entitled to a vigorous defence, including doing their due diligence in pursuing other suspects and would open up team R to a lot of renewed scrutiny. So it is my belief that JR knows full well it won’t be this kind of match.
2D. A dna profile matched to no one known. This serves JR well, as it perpetuates a nameless faceless intruder. It doesn’t explain the RN, but it also doesn’t invite further public scrutiny of the facts of the case, including the RN that looks an awful lot like it was written by the victim’s mother.

This is all just my own mind working through a mystery. I would love to see this solved, and I’ll be happy to issue me a culpas for being so wrong if there was in fact no R involvement in any part of this crime.

 

[james01]

I don't think there's anything wrong with getting an attorney; actually it's very wise. However, their actions afterward were suspicious.

You're absolutely right—getting an attorney is definitely a smart move when you need legal help, as they can guide you through the process and protect your interests. But if their actions afterward raised some red flags, it’s understandable that you'd be cautious. Trust your instincts and don’t hesitate to seek a second opinion or find someone else you feel more comfortable with. Your peace of mind is key!

 

[snarast]

Snipped to focus on this point- dna

In my opinion - I think JR knows the best defence is a good offense. He knows it looks good for him to push for dna testing. I believe he knows, if the testing ever happens, it will not provide any evidence against any Rs.

Let’s say there is testing. What are the possible outcomes?

1. Nothing - sample too small. But it looks good that JR pushed for it!
2. Something - a dna profile.
2A. A dna profile match to an R - J, P, or B. No problem. They lived in the same home, they coughed, breathed, peed, hugged, touched in the same home. A defence team could drive a truck thru reasonable doubt, so JR is not worried about this finding.
2B. A dna profile match to someone known, ie in the codis system. Doubtful, unless you believe they would be motivated to write the RN. To what end? So I don’t see this happening. I doubt JR believes some sex offender wrote that RN either.
2C. A dna profile match to someone known/not in codis such as friend or someone in circle of friends. They will also have to have no alibi. They would also be entitled to a vigorous defence, including doing their due diligence in pursuing other suspects and would open up team R to a lot of renewed scrutiny. So it is my belief that JR knows full well it won’t be this kind of match.
2D. A dna profile matched to no one known. This serves JR well, as it perpetuates a nameless faceless intruder. It doesn’t explain the RN, but it also doesn’t invite further public scrutiny of the facts of the case, including the RN that looks an awful lot like it was written by the victim’s mother.

This is all just my own mind working through a mystery. I would love to see this solved, and I’ll be happy to issue me a culpas for being so wrong if there was in fact no R involvement in any part of this crime.

The chances genetic genealogy will work - ie finding a match - are excellent. That is because it’s a caucasian (overrepresented in GG dbs) - and the perp is likely to come from a family of means - the kind that may actually have the resources to spend time and money on genealogy.

The wealthier the family, the more likely the DNA is well annotated.

And the wealthier the family, the more unlikely their DNA is in codis. Because they can afford better lawyers.

JR is spending his last years pushing for this - why would he do that if he was guilty? Just enjoy the Netflix series and sit back would have been the natural response if he was guilty.

IMHO

 

[GRT]

When we look at IDI theories, as I said earlier, it is the RN that is the clincher for me. If we conclude PR wrote it, this topples IDI theories. Of course then we are left wondering her motive for writing it, and what exactly happened in that home that night.

I haven't reached that conclusion because I don't believe it can be logically supported. We had some outside experts conclude (based on non-verified examples) that PR wrote the note. However, the experts officially contracted by LE (who had access to a much wider range of examples) rated PR 4.5 out of 5, with 5 being no chance whatsoever of writing the note. So the RN goes from being a "clincher" to being a non-starter.

This is where I get angry at the privileges given the Rs that are not usually given to suspects. If they had been compelled to sit for interviews on the timeline of LE, and not on unreasonable terms set out be their legal team, the outcome would likely have been more different.

Highly unlikely. In the days following their daughter's murder, they did comply with LE, until it became clear that LE was more interested in investigating the Rs than their child's murder.

Imagine if PR and JR were placed in separate interview rooms and the facts were placed before them, including preliminary evidence the RN was written by PR.
They took months to hand over things like the clothes they were wearing. When do defendants get to do that?

It took months for LE to request the clothing. How in the world were the Rs supposed to quickly comply when--almost a year after their child's murder--LE decided to ask for the clothes they were wearing that night?

If someone asks you to produce the clothes you were wearing on a night 11 months ago, could you do it? Do you even know what you were wearing, say, on Valentine's Day last year?

Imagine if missing phone records had been saved and placed in evidence. What might they tell us?

Likely nothing.

Imagine if the enhanced recording of the tail end of the 911 call was still available. It happened, it was done, I don’t believe whoever performed the work on enhancing it made up the words they reported as being heard (“not talking to you!”, “what did you find?”) Why is this no longer considered part of the case?

Nothing digital, once uploaded to the internet, ceases to exist. But being "enhanced" and being a digital forgery are two very different things. In the genuine 911 tape, there is no enhanced tail end that contains those words.

Imagine if the GJ proceedings were made public. Something made the GJ opt for handing down true bills.

Yes, but not for murder.

 

[GRT]

JR is spending his last years pushing for this - why would he do that if he was guilty? Just enjoy the Netflix series and sit back would have been the natural response if he was guilty.

RSBM

That, of course, is the elephant in the room. Had he killed his daughter--or known who killed her and covered it up--he would have slunk off and led a very private life away from the media.

 

[Ponytale]

The chances genetic genealogy will work - ie finding a match - are excellent. That is because it’s a caucasian (overrepresented in GG dbs) - and the perp is likely to come from a family of means - the kind that may actually have the resources to spend time and money on genealogy.

The wealthier the family, the more likely the DNA is well annotated.

And the wealthier the family, the more unlikely their DNA is in codis. Because they can afford better lawyers.

JR is spending his last years pushing for this - why would he do that if he was guilty? Just enjoy the Netflix series and sit back would have been the natural response if he was guilty.

IMHO

IMO, if there really was an intruder in the house doing it all, we wouldn't be dancing for years around this minuscule microscopic partial DNA sample that hasn't matched anyone in over 20 years. Experts have stated that this is not believed to be a DNA case, and even Mitch Morrissey has confirmed that even this new "genetic genealogy" probably will not do much if anything to help solve it.

Mitch Morrissey: The problem with using genetic genealogy on that is it is a mixture. So, when you go to sequence it, you're going to get both persons types in the sequence. And it's a very, very small amount of DNA. And for genetic genealogy to do sequencing, you need a lot more DNA than what you're used to in the criminal system. So, where you could test maybe eight skin cells and get a profile and, you know, solve your murder, or exonerate an innocent person, you can't do that with sequencing. You've got to have a pretty good amount of DNA.

The only hope here, regarding this DNA, is that they well re-test all the evidence that they have and actually find another match to this UM-1. Now if that happens and that match is of a better quality, there is some hope that it could be a DNA case. But I will not believe it until it happens.

And regarding John pushing the DNA - Why not do it if he was guilty? If his DNA is there it would not matter. Same with Patsy and Burke. They all lived in the same house and their DNA is expected to be everywhere. But pushing it shows his care for justice and keeps people talking about a "good father who still fights for his daughter after 28 years in hopes of finally finding the killer".

 

[Ponytale]

I haven't reached that conclusion because I don't believe it can be logically supported. We had some outside experts conclude (based on non-verified examples) that PR wrote the note. However, the experts officially contracted by LE (who had access to a much wider range of examples) rated PR 4.5 out of 5, with 5 being no chance whatsoever of writing the note. So the RN goes from being a "clincher" to being a non-starter.

When these habitually repeated and identifiable characteristics were compared to known handwriting samples of Patsy Ramsey, Exhibits 2-10 (1-47), overwhelmingly agreement was found to exist to such an extent that they cannot be attributed to mere chance. Accordingly, it has been determined that Patsy Ramsey is the writer of the ransom note. - Larry A. Ziegler,Forensic Examiner of Forensic Documents,Retired FBI Examiner

There is no doubt that Patsy Ramsey is the author of the ransom note.
- Gideon Epstein, M.F.S. Forensic Document Examiner

It is the opinion of this examiner, with a reasonable degree of scientific certainty that it is very highly probable, the three page ransom note was authored by the same author purported to be that of Patsy Ramsey.
- Donald L. Lucy C.D.E. Certified Forensic Document Examiner

It is highly probable that Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom note.
- Cina L. Wong, Court certified/Board certified Document Examiner

And even those document examiners hired by the Ramsey's could not eliminate Patsy as the author of the ransom note. This statement of "4.5 points" that they keep telling everywhere is the only thing they have to hold on to. So I see why they keep preaching about it...

I see enough evidence here. A non-starter, really?

Highly unlikely. In the days following their daughter's murder, they did comply with LE, until it became clear that LE was more interested in investigating the Rs than their child's murder.

It was the opposite of that actually. The LE started investigating the Ramsey's because of their actions that caused them to be suspicious.

What actions from the Ramsey's can you point out as proof that they actually have been interested in investigating their child's murder?

It took months for LE to request the clothing. How in the world were the Rs supposed to quickly comply when--almost a year after their child's murder--LE decided to ask for the clothes they were wearing that night?

Yes, it is a huge mistake on the part of LE. I agree.

But again - if they were innocent parents who, by that time, already knew that police were suspicious of them - why not go and provide additional evidence to support the claim of their innocence? Just a thought.

If I were suspected in something and I knew I had nothing to do with it I wouldn't wait for the police to come knock on my door asking for proof - I would be knocking on their door to provide photos, records, statements, items or what ever I have in my possession, that would show that I have nothing to do with it, because I would have nothing to be afraid of if I didn't do it. Even if they think that I am guilty of being involved I would still go for it - because then they can eliminate me faster and proceed with finding the real killer, not spending that precious time on me.
It would serve my interest. IMO

If someone asks you to produce the clothes you were wearing on a night 11 months ago, could you do it? Do you even know what you were wearing, say, on Valentine's Day last year?

Yes I would know. I would remember what I wore on that faithful day until I die. I lost a loved one 30 years ago and I still remember what she wore, what I wore. Even the colors of my outfit and the smell of my black sweater. I remember how I broke my stockings coming out of the car and cried about it and I remember what my family members wore. I remember the timing and the weather that day. I remember my emotions and many reactions of others around me.

There are things that stick with you forever. If you lose your loved one, especially through a traumatic event, you will not forget it. Even if you wanted to.

You can not compere something like that to a Valentines day or any other reoccurring holiday. Have you not been in a traumatic situation in your life? If you were, you would remember.

And I will never believe that the Ramsey all just forgot about it and it all became such a blur, after only a few days had passed.

Likely nothing.

Only because you have decided so. I mean, if I remember correctly, you were on the Fleet did it camp, right? So if John and Fleet made phone calls before the 911 call that could prove Fleet's involvement, would it not matter?

Nothing digital, once uploaded to the internet, ceases to exist. But being "enhanced" and being a digital forgery are two very different things. In the genuine 911 tape, there is no enhanced tail end that contains those words.

Just because we have not been able to hear those words said, does not prove that they do not exist.
Bonita papers:
On the morning of April 22, Hickman met again with Roeder in his office at Aerospace. The detective and the engineer went to a small lab to work with the disk to try to filter out extraneous noise and enhance the voices in the background. Roeder made several variations using different noise reduction settings, and those recordings were then copied onto the JAZ drive. They returned to Roeder's office where they were able to further enhance the disc.

Kolar:
Producing a previous set of handwritten notes, the technicians revealed their interpretation of the words spoken by the voices heard on the tail end of the tape. They all stared in amazement. Everyone who had listened to the enhanced version of the 911 tape had independently identified the same words and gender of the people speaking them. There were three distinct voices heard on the tape and the conversation was identified as follows:
Male (angry): "We're not speaking to you!"
Female: "Help me Jesus. Help me Jesus"
Young male: "Well, what did you find?"

Yes, but not for murder.

This is your opinion only. You do not know the reasons behind their decisions.

 

[snarast]

IMO, if there really was an intruder in the house doing it all, we wouldn't be dancing for years around this minuscule microscopic partial DNA sample that hasn't matched anyone in over 20 years. Experts have stated that this is not believed to be a DNA case, and even Mitch Morrissey has confirmed that even this new "genetic genealogy" probably will not do much if anything to help solve it.

Mitch Morrissey: The problem with using genetic genealogy on that is it is a mixture. So, when you go to sequence it, you're going to get both persons types in the sequence. And it's a very, very small amount of DNA. And for genetic genealogy to do sequencing, you need a lot more DNA than what you're used to in the criminal system. So, where you could test maybe eight skin cells and get a profile and, you know, solve your murder, or exonerate an innocent person, you can't do that with sequencing. You've got to have a pretty good amount of DNA.

The only hope here, regarding this DNA, is that they well re-test all the evidence that they have and actually find another match to this UM-1. Now if that happens and that match is of a better quality, there is some hope that it could be a DNA case. But I will not believe it until it happens.

And regarding John pushing the DNA - Why not do it if he was guilty? If his DNA is there it would not matter. Same with Patsy and Burke. They all lived in the same house and their DNA is expected to be everywhere. But pushing it shows his care for justice and keeps people talking about a "good father who still fights for his daughter after 28 years in hopes of finally finding the killer".

Respectfully, that quote makes absolutely no sense.

Most samples are mixed. GG doesn’t ”do any sequencing”, it’s a processing step performed with software and manual inspection.

Do you get the impression that JR is enjoying himself? I don’t.

 

[Ponytale]

Respectfully, that quote makes absolutely no sense.

Most samples are mixed. GG doesn’t ”do any sequencing”, it’s a processing step performed with software and manual inspection.

I am not claiming to be an expert on that topic and I only read and quote what other people, who have more expertise on that matter, have said. But I am also not qualified to debunk this statement. So I'll leave the validation of that quote to those who do have more knowledge.

But regardless, I still believe as I stated - I will believe it to be a DNA case if I really see evidence of that happening. If there is sufficient DNA found or if there will be a match made. I'm not against it at all - if there will be a match to an intruder that can be proved to be connected to the crime beyond a reasonable doubt - I'm happy to see the case finally solved.

Until that happens, I see that the DNA we have right now does not provide any reason to believe that it is a DNA case.

 

[fridaybaker]

BSBM: "And most telling to me is when Patsy said that "IF there was an intruder..." If... What?"
Good catch, Ponytale.

 

[Slebby]

The chances genetic genealogy will work - ie finding a match - are excellent. That is because it’s a caucasian (overrepresented in GG dbs) - and the perp is likely to come from a family of means - the kind that may actually have the resources to spend time and money on genealogy.

The wealthier the family, the more likely the DNA is well annotated.

And the wealthier the family, the more unlikely their DNA is in codis. Because they can afford better lawyers.

JR is spending his last years pushing for this - why would he do that if he was guilty? Just enjoy the Netflix series and sit back would have been the natural response if he was guilty.

IMHO

I would be ecstatic if the dna was tested and the killer was found.

 

[fridaybaker]

I also agree 100%. The only way this gets pulled off is with a lot of help, and the Ramseys had it in spades. Those who want to ignore this and discount all the powerful connections there were with influential players as "conspiracy theories" are in my opinion quite naive.

More than one investigator who took part in the interviews that were finally agreed to 4 months after the fact have said how well prepared the Ramseys were. They were coached. They had plenty of time to agree to what was going to be said and what was going to be ignored or "not remembered". They have described it as "scripted".

The Larry King interview with Det. Thomas was very telling IMO.

CloudedTruth, I'm forgetting so mucn in this case, it's so old. Is that correct that they weren't interviewed by investigators for four months? If so, that is astounding. Wouldn't one of the first things that any detective a day out of "detective school" would do would be to separate the parents and interview them?

I'm not a detective, but that's what I would do. I think that's really what anyone would do, detective or not, because that's what makes sense. And I'd think it would be done immediately, whilst also running it as a real, live, outside, kidnapping situation. If I showed up to that house alone, I'd get backup yesterday, and have someone interview those parents separately. And they wouldn't be out of my sight until that was done. What am I missing?

 

[fridaybaker]

Now honestly. How can anyone believe that John Ramsey lost his cell phone and didn't replace it for a month? Seriously, that is one of the most unbelievable facts in this case that in my mind is just laughable. Oh, and, by the way: That happened the same month that his daughter was kidnapped by what was it? "A small, foreign faction"?

 

[Ponytale]

CloudedTruth, I'm forgetting so mucn in this case, it's so old. Is that correct that they weren't interviewed by investigators for four months? If so, that is astounding. Wouldn't one of the first things that any detective a day out of "detective school" would do would be to separate the parents and interview them?

I'm not a detective, but that's what I would do. I think that's really what anyone would do, detective or not, because that's what makes sense. And I'd think it would be done immediately, whilst also running it as a real, live, outside, kidnapping situation. If I showed up to that house alone, I'd get backup yesterday, and have someone interview those parents separately. And they wouldn't be out of my sight until that was done. What am I missing?

Yes, they gave their first formal interview in the month of April, 1997. A good indication of an innocent and cooperating parent, isn't it?

They became (willfully, IMO) the puppets of their lawyers, who explained it all by Ramsey's being grieving parents who needed time. Sure - if your child is murdered you definitely need 4 months to grieve and not cooperate.
So they had time to set their stories straight and rehearse their statements. They even had the questions asked for them by their lawyers so they knew exactly what to be prepared for. These lawyers placed conditions for the interview - they had to be interviewed together, interview couldn't last more than 90 minutes, and the police had to give them their questions in advance - as well as all the statements they had made previously.

A perfect example what money and power can do for you.

And some wonder why did the police start to accuse them and suspect them in the first place. Could it be more obvious?

It was never about finding the killer, it was all about defending themselves. IMO

 

[fridaybaker]

From Pseudonymph's post above: "She was very loved, by every account. They'd call 911 and figure out the rest later."
That is, of course, a statement of opinion. I can assure you that many of us have a very different opinion. Mine is that John and Patsy loved themselves. To Patsy, JBR especially, was a fulfillment of her own dreams. She lived vicariously through her. If dressing your precious, innocent, daughter up as a tart for the world to gaggle at, is representative of "love", well, I'm glad I didn't have any of it as a child. My parents did the opposite: They struggled each day to place the focus of life away from looks, from having me be the center of attention, from showing off myself. And it's not just the pageants. Some pageant children simply dressed up in adult makeup, etc., but PR specifically wanted JBR to do sexually suggestive moves. Huh? I'm sure there many men who lusted after her.

Then there are the Christmas tours of the house. A parent's main job, aside from the education and character formation of their child is to protect them. Patsy opened up their home every Christmas to the public, including her children's bedrooms. First of all, how dare she. How dare she invade her children's privacy like that? Even opening up the main part of the house where small children live is unconscionable. Those children have a right to a private home life. If Patsy and John wanted to show off their home to the public, so be it. But the children don't have a say. They don't have the ability to make that decision, so the parent has to wait and show off their home until they no longer have minor children living there. But their bedrooms? That's beyond the pale. This is even before considering the purient aspect of opening up the possibility of adult men who love to look at tarted up little girls dancing suggestively now having access to tour the child's bedroom. Then there's the safety issue. I'd think if Patsy and John wanted someone to come into their home and rape or kidnap their child, showing the public the layout of their house would be a great way to assist that.

No one will ever convince me that John or Patsy Ramsey loved their children. Their children were what many children are to their parents: Adornment for them.

 

[fridaybaker]

From GRT's post: "Finally, JR has been pushing for decades to have the DNA tested with better technology. A guilty person is unlikely to do that."

Why not? I think that's exactly what he would do. The Ramseys have been at the epicenter of a massively huge case of murder of, or at the very least the coverup of the accidental death of, their small child. It's a national story that just won't go away. The reason it won't go away, IMO, is because many, many people, who wondered how this could have happened, read about it and saw that the Ramsey's obviously did it. There's outrage about how such people, wealthy, white, "Church-going, active in the community", beautiful house, perfect little family, etc. were treated with kid gloves. There are accusations both overt and implied against Patsy, against John, and against Burke.

What better way to fend off those accusations by claiming you want "more investigation". (Remember OJ talking nonstop about looking for Nicole's killer. Which he did, by the way, on every golf course in America. But he certainly talked the game.) John knows he can't be convicted by DNA, as his DNA being present means virtually nothing. He lives in the house, takes care of his daughter, picked her up and handled her that very morning... Even if there were DNA "where there shouldn't be", at the very worst, he could plead that he found her and cleaned her out of compassion, etc. His DNA really means nothing, except it's a great way to tell everyone that he so wants the "real killer" to be found. Yeah, right.

 

[fridaybaker]

I just want to say: I apologize as I've just now realized that I started responding to comments before looking at the two pages of posts, many of which have already said some of the same things I'm saying now. I guess that's a lesson to read through all of the current posts before commenting!

 

[GRT]

This is your opinion only. You do not know the reasons behind their decisions.

RSBM for focus.

It's not my opinion. It's in the True Bills. The GJ indicted for "accessory to first-degree murder" and for "child abuse."

They did not hand down a true bill on murder.

The GJ juror who spoke to the media mentioned he felt they were guilty of something because he saw JBR dressed up in provocative ways, and he found that disgusting. That was his base reasoning.

It's very likely the true bills reflected that same sentiment and saw JBR's participation in those pageants as abusive and also what led to someone killing her.

 

[Ponytale]

RSBM for focus.
It's not my opinion. It's in the True Bills. The GJ indicted for "accessory to first-degree murder" and for "child abuse."
They did not hand down a true bill on murder.

Yes. But we do not know their reasoning behind that. There are different possibilities why they chose so...

The GJ juror who spoke to the media mentioned he felt they were guilty of something because he saw JBR dressed up in provocative ways, and he found that disgusting. That was his base reasoning.

Yes, but that statement is only form one GJ juror. There is another GJ juror who said that they believed that the Patsy wrote the note. These are all opinions. As long as the GJ documents are not made public we can never know anything for sure.

It's very likely the true bills reflected that same sentiment and saw JBR's participation in those pageants as abusive and also what led to someone killing her.

It is one possibility only.

 

[snarast]

I am not claiming to be an expert on that topic and I only read and quote what other people, who have more expertise on that matter, have said. But I am also not qualified to debunk this statement. So I'll leave the validation of that quote to those who do have more knowledge.

But regardless, I still believe as I stated - I will believe it to be a DNA case if I really see evidence of that happening. If there is sufficient DNA found or if there will be a match made. I'm not against it at all - if there will be a match to an intruder that can be proved to be connected to the crime beyond a reasonable doubt - I'm happy to see the case finally solved.

Until that happens, I see that the DNA we have right now does not provide any reason to believe that it is a DNA case.

As a DA he probably has an idea but not a phD in the area. He probably figures he has to dumb it down for us simpletons.

Anyway - you are absolutely right in that if there is no relevant DNA of appropriate size and quality it is not a DNA case.

But lets give it a chance.