Jon Benet's Family Exhonerated

[Magpie]

The Ramseys failed to exonerate themselves and its far too late to do so.

I have to agree with that.

[Roy Corduroy]

Gentlemen, I posted the letter from the DA. Have you read it?

DNA, that great modern crime fighting tool, is sometimes used to convict people. In this case, it was used to clear them. It's all right there in the letter. And yes of course it only matters in Colorado, the one place they could have been charged with this murder. But no more.

You can hit the delete key and forget all the bad things you ever thought about the Ramseys. You can forget all the bad things the talking heads ever said about the Ramseys. And you can forget everything Cyril Wecht ever said about anything.

Sincerely,

Judge Roy Bean Corduroy III

[Mitch Rowe]

So Ive read the letter and I have so many arguments with it it would take me hours to rebutt.

The letter admits they dont know who the killer is. The letter admits an unknown male touched the clothing on JBR. The letter assumes JBR was wearing clothes at the time of the attack.

The letter is absolutely meaningless when it comes to indicating the guilt or innocence of anyone.

[sdreid]

The DNA was not semen so it could very well mean nothing. Even if it was semen, it wouldn't necessarily mean that the Ramseys were not involved. What other scenario really makes much sense. A kidnapper who sits down in the home and writes the ransom note, leaves it there but then kills the child instead of taking her. Yes, that's perfectly logical.

Name some other case where that happened.

[Mitch Rowe]

Name some other case where that happened.

I guarantee there wont be any. Now or in the future. Unless its some copy cat thing or a miracle.

Thats why I say a coverup or framing is the Ramseys only defense. That the police knew the letter was fake and played along with the coverup because the letter was so obviously fake they should have known that at a glance!

[Mort Belfry]

Unidentified dna was found in JonBenet's fingernails and underpants.
Just been reading John Douglas's book. The Cases That Haunt Us. The criminal profiler has very interesting perspectives on a number of cases.

Awesome book, very convincing about the Ramsey case. I have to read it again.

[Tom_Wescott]

Try reading a book by someone who wasn't on the Ramsey's payroll, such as the book by the investigating detective.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Tom!

Cannot help saying on my behalf;

I've read books about this case by the "Ramsey payroll" people, so to say and by the investigating people!

I'd like to read a book aiming at an objective view! The investigator - unfortunately - only tells the one's personal view!

All the best
Jukka

[miss marple]

Your right Mort, it is an awesome book.
Douglas gives a very fair detailed account of his involvement in the case.He approaches the case as any professional would and brings vast knowledge and experience to the understanding of the conditions, the evidence and characters in the case. He was not 'on the payroll of the ramseys' and makes no claims, he just goes through everything very carefully and explains what he is doing and why. His assessment of the ransom note is very enlightening,
The rest of the book is equally good, he does Jack and Zodiac among others. I can honestly say it is one of the best true crime books I have read, and I ve reads loads. He makes you look at things from a different perspective.
I would recommend it to anyone, but for fairness sake read it in conjunction with the detective's book about the Jo benet case.
Miss Marple

[Ally]

Actually John Douglas was in fact on the payroll of the Ramseys. He was hired by them and paid by them to give an opinion on the case. His opinion is therefore suspect.

[sdreid]

The News said that the Ramseys hired Douglas about 3 weeks after the murder so exactly how could he have not been on their payroll?

[miss marple]

Read the book, then you can pick holes in it, but don't criticise it if you have not read it.Every detail about the case is there.I am not going to quote from him, there is too much. His concern is finding the truth for the victim. Paying an expert, a consultation fee is standard practice, he was not on a payroll.
Miss Marple

[Ally]

I actually have read the book. I have read all the books on the Ramsey case. Own them too. Well except the one the Ramseys wrote themselves, the proceeds of which were to go to their defense fund. That one I just skimmed through in the book store while having a mocha.

If you are paid in a criminal investigation by people who are have a motive to be proved innocent, then your opinion is suspect. He was paid by the Ramseys. Therefore, an opinion that exonerates them is meaningless since he was paid for it by the people he exonerated.

They could be lily white innocent, but an expert paid for by them is not going to establish that.

[Mitch Rowe]

Anyones opinion that exonerates anyone is just that. An opinion.

At this point the only opinion that matters is the real killers. Unless the killer/s is in fact a total stranger. If not then the real killer/s must deny the Ramseys involvement and we must be assured in no way could the Ramseys have known or participated in the murders with the true killer/s.

If the killer/s admit that he/she attempted to frame the Ramseys and it seems plausable maybe that will explain the curious kidnapping scenario but it wont explain the Ramseys curious behaviour. The only way I could explain that is that the Ramseys were such bubbleheads that when the killer/s saw a prime opputunity they couldnt resist.

Having said that if I were to be put in charge of solving the case today the Ramseys would NOT be my prime suspects. Because convicting them is going to be impossible. My only hope ever would be that it was in fact a stranger and we might find the match to the dna. My first thought would to find out where the dna came from. And my first thought on that is JBR plays rough with a childhood friend. JBR scratches childhood friend. JBR decides to go potty.

[cappuccina]

Patsy did it.