JonBenet Ramsey Murder case

[Wickerman]

And as if to demonstrate the point you talk again about DNA in this case. Lordy I've explained the DNA many times, but here goes again……

This is part of your problem - YOU'VE explained!!!
Who are YOU?
What letters do you have after your name, what claim to experience in this field do you claim to have?

The DNA in this case is touch DNA, there is no DNA directly linking an intruder to the crime scene. No foreign fibers,

Yes there is, brown fibers - unsourced.

no hair,

Yes there is, one 'foreign' short hair, like pubic or chest, or underarm hair.

no fingerprints, nothing.

No identifiable latent fingerprints, which does not mean nothing. A partial print with no identifiable whirls or loops is of no value, yet clearly someone was present.
There was a partial palm print on the ransom note.

Touch DNA is common, particularly on unwashed and clean from factory clothing. Without a source it has no real meaning and is not strong enough to prove any intruder or Ramsey innocence.

Yes, and newly purchased examples of this kind of DNA show it is very small, about 10% of the strength of what turned up on JB's clothing.
On both sides of her waist band, but nowhere else? - rather odd if it is a laundering transfer - a very precise 'accident' of transfer to end up only in the exact location where someone would handle her pants in removing her clothes.

He did have a solid alibi - just like everyone else who was eliminated. Only three people didn't have solid alibis - the Ramseys.

He claimed to be at home with his wife.
That's not considered a solid alibi, the law do not expect the spouse to say anything different.
Like I said, Jeff Merrick remained a suspect.

And you ask "revenge for what?" - You are going to have to read my post. Merrick went to John's bosses, Lockheed Martin, to complain about the way he was being treated. You'll have to read what he says in the link.

I did.

You know full well that John's bonus was $118,000

His bonus was $117,000+, something less than the rounded number of $118,000. I posted the sum weeks ago.

You were looking at an "exact amount", weren't you, when you stated this in one of your posts yesterday…....

What is exact about "close to #118,000"?

So please stop trying to back pedal on what you posted.
.
.

What?

[Wickerman]

HI TEC BOOTS

http://tamaratattles.com/2016/09/21/lin-wood-on-behalf-of-burke-ramsey-sues-cbs-over-jonbenet-ramsey-series/

The Ramseys' lawyer, Lin Wood, stated emphatically on the Dr. Phil show that no one in the R family owned Hi Tec boots, when he knew very well that Burke testified to the Grand Jury that he did have those boots and he got them on a shopping trip to Atlanta with his mother.

In the Dr. Phil interview Burke did not recall the make of the hiking boots he had. He could only remember the logo tag on the side of the boot. He didn't say what that tag was.

[louisa]

His bonus was $117,000+, something less than the rounded number of $118,000. I posted the sum weeks ago.

I think I had better remind you of what you posted just a couple of days ago......

I mean like the amount - $118,000, why on earth would she (Patsy) limit the amount to his bonus?

Picking a paltry sum like $118,000 is too close to home, not many people knew the amount of his bonus.

No identifiable latent fingerprints, which does not mean nothing. A partial print with no identifiable whirls or loops is of no value, yet clearly someone was present.
There was a partial palm print on the ransom note.

Oh for heavens sake, Wicksy - you're arguing just for the sake of it now.

"Yet clearly someone was present"

Well, yes, the person who wrote the ransom note was present. And SHE wore gloves.


THERE WERE NO FINGERPRINTS - only those from Chet Ubowski - the document examiner.

In the Dr. Phil interview Burke did not recall the make of the hiking boots he had. He could only remember the logo tag on the side of the boot. He didn't say what that tag was.

We're not talking about Dr. Phil we're talking about BR's testimony to the Grand Jury in 1999.



As to your other points - all DNA has been explained BY EXPERTS. I have posted all the relevant links but if you wish to ignore them and continue with your (idiotic) theories, then so be it.

And as for Jeff Merrick - he was CLEARED. I would have thought you would have known that. Everyone the Ramseys 'threw under the bus' were cleared.

It is only the Ramseys who remain under the umbrella of suspicion and until such time as somebody is convicted, that is how things will stay. (according to the DA)

.
.

[Pcdunn]

Okay, let's look at the DNA evidence again. There were problems with the original samples because they were too small, and the markers they looked at weren't enough to either match or exclude any suspect. ("Dateline" episode on Ramsey case, 2016.)

The expert quoted on the local Denver news report last month stated "this should never have become a DNA case." I think it was also here that mention was made of "touch DNA" from handling during the manufacturing and packaging process were found in a study of 10 new underpants to exist, but be a combination from different contributors, degraded, and too small to be of use in testing for identity.

JBR's underwear had unknown DNA in larger quantities than that seen in the test study of new clothing. Recent comments refer to it coming from an "unknown Hispanic male." There was a suspect mentioned in the two-part TV documentary who was Spanish-surnamed, and had a sort of shrine to JBR at his home. He was supposedly cleared by the DNA not matching, but then so were the Ramsey males. If there was poor testing method in the original DNA tests, then it cannot be the piece of evidence the case rests upon.
T
Therefore, both Ramseys and outside persons should still remain considered suspects.

[Wickerman]

Hunter was one of Ramseys golfing buddies.,

Did I miss your explanation & source for this repeated assertion?

[Wickerman]

Okay, let's look at the DNA evidence again. There were problems with the original samples because they were too small, and the markers they looked at weren't enough to either match or exclude any suspect. ("Dateline" episode on Ramsey case, 2016.)

The expert quoted on the local Denver news report last month stated "this should never have become a DNA case." I think it was also here that mention was made of "touch DNA" from handling during the manufacturing and packaging process were found in a study of 10 new underpants to exist, but be a combination from different contributors, degraded, and too small to be of use in testing for identity.

JBR's underwear had unknown DNA in larger quantities than that seen in the test study of new clothing. Recent comments refer to it coming from an "unknown Hispanic male." There was a suspect mentioned in the two-part TV documentary who was Spanish-surnamed, and had a sort of shrine to JBR at his home. He was supposedly cleared by the DNA not matching, but then so were the Ramsey males. If there was poor testing method in the original DNA tests, then it cannot be the piece of evidence the case rests upon.
T
Therefore, both Ramseys and outside persons should still remain considered suspects.

Agreed.
The intruder has never been ruled out, that's pretty much the extent of my argument.
Patsy, or Burke with Patsy, or an intruder, are all still potential candidates to varying degree's. Each candidate can be supported by some evidence, yet negated by other.
There is no conclusive solution, to date, which encompasses all the evidence in this case.

[louisa]

There is no conclusive solution, to date, which encompasses all the evidence in this case.

My Theory

Upon returning home the family started getting ready for bed. Burke and JBR got up and went down to the kitichen. JBR snaffled a piece of the pineapple from Burke's bowl and he picked up the flashlight and hit her on the head, causing her skull to cave in. She looked dead.

BR had a lot of animosity towards his sister. She was her mother's favourite and got all the attention. He decided to use a garotte on her - as he may have seen in one of his magazines. A lot of kids like anything macabre stuff.

Patsy, who hadn't gotten undressed yet came downstairs to find out what was going on. She saw her child dead on the kitchen floor. THAT is the scream the neighbours heard.

She called John and together they agreed on a plan. They sent Burke to bed with the STRICTEST instructions not to move from the bed or talk to ANYONE. I suspect old Patsy could be quite intimidating when she wanted to be.

Now what to do? Panic panic. How would it look to family and friends, and their church, if JBR was found dead in their locked home? They were the only people present.

They HAD to invent an intruder in order to save themselves. That is when they formed a plan. It would be a kidnapping.

Patsy put on plastic gloves, got out her pad and pen and began to write…

They took JBR's body out to the garage and put her in either Patsy or John's car, then they would drive out and leave her somewhere. Then they got cold feet - supposing they were seen? Or forensics discovered the car had been used a lot later than 10pm when they returned from the party?

Then they devised a better plan……

The next step was to call the police, which Patsy did.

---------------------------------------------

The Plan

The Ramseys may have thought that they would NOT actually have to leave the house. They may have thought the police and FBI would turn up and do whatever they needed to do, and then, when the kidnapper's call didn't materialize, would then leave. Leaving the Ramseys alone.

They may have thought that the police would not search the house. Why should they? It was a kidnapping after all. Their child had been 'taken'.

A while later, after the police and detectives had left, the Ramseys would have then called the police again and claimed that JB had been "returned to them" dead, the kidnappers having killed her because they called the police. That was going to be their story.

---------------------------------------------------

The house was still, no one was moving. Patsy was pretending to cry and was being comforted by all her friends and the Pastor.

John then realized then that putting JBR's body in the car was a BIG mistake. He had to move her. This is where John's 'missing' time comes into it. While everyone was pre-occupied he went out to the garage, took JBR's body and took her down to the little basement room. He hadn't realised that Fleet White had checked the room earlier looking for JBR. He wrapped the blanket around her and went back upstairs.

John was in mental torment. The police were showing no signs of going; something had to be done.

He couldn't take the agony of waiting around anymore because he knew JonBenet was in the basement, that's why he headed straight down there. He wanted to "find" JonBenet and get it over with. And he knew he had to get the family out of there ASAP before the detectives started asking awkward questions. John knew that Patsy and Burke would crack under strong questioning.

John knew he had to distance the family from the crime and that is why (half an hour after he 'discovered' his daughter's body) he phoned his pilot to ready the plane to fly the family to Atlanta. (The flight was later cancelled by telephone by John's friend Fleet White).

After JonBenet was found and after the Ramseys prayed over her they just up and left, Patsy vowed never to come back to that house. They didn't even make sure their daughter got to the morgue. If Patsy was so worried about her baby, she would have stayed close by until they took her child out of the house. They left her behind like she was an old pair of shoes.


It explains why Fleet White saw an empty room when he looked in the cellar earlier.
.
.

[louisa]

If anyone is in doubt of the close affiliation between the Ramseys lawyer, Lin Wood, and Alex Hunter (the DA) this might set you straight....

It seems the Ramseys' attorney drew up Hunter's Affadavit and faxed it to him for approval.

However, Hunter has crossed out sections that make disclaimers about Burke being involved or not being liable for future prosecution, which is very telling indeed!

Scroll down for the entire document.........

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?4496-Lin-Wood-Affidavit-for-Alex-Hunter-Unedited

.

[Abby Normal]

Okay, let's look at the DNA evidence again. There were problems with the original samples because they were too small, and the markers they looked at weren't enough to either match or exclude any suspect. ("Dateline" episode on Ramsey case, 2016.)

The expert quoted on the local Denver news report last month stated "this should never have become a DNA case." I think it was also here that mention was made of "touch DNA" from handling during the manufacturing and packaging process were found in a study of 10 new underpants to exist, but be a combination from different contributors, degraded, and too small to be of use in testing for identity.

JBR's underwear had unknown DNA in larger quantities than that seen in the test study of new clothing. Recent comments refer to it coming from an "unknown Hispanic male." There was a suspect mentioned in the two-part TV documentary who was Spanish-surnamed, and had a sort of shrine to JBR at his home. He was supposedly cleared by the DNA not matching, but then so were the Ramsey males. If there was poor testing method in the original DNA tests, then it cannot be the piece of evidence the case rests upon.
T
Therefore, both Ramseys and outside persons should still remain considered suspects.

Exactly.
I'm starting to think its not only a red herring but actually obfuscating things. As in, no one will be a match to that DNA, even the person who left it, because it's not enough to match to anyone including the person who left it!

If anyone who knows more about DNA please pipe up if what I'm saying could be true.


One thing for sure, the prosecuted who "exonerated" the Ramsey's based on the DNA was waaaayyyy out of line.

[louisa]

Exactly.

One thing for sure, the prosecuted who "exonerated" the Ramsey's based on the DNA was waaaayyyy out of line.

That's right. I couldn't have put it better myself. She wasn't fit for office. Even her own colleagues were shocked.

The letter she wrote to them was cringe-making. She probably lived to regret it though, after the flak she received.

http://nypost.com/2016/10/28/new-dna-twist-in-jonbenet-ramsey-murder/

.
.

[Wickerman]

Exactly.
I'm starting to think its not only a red herring but actually obfuscating things. As in, no one will be a match to that DNA, even the person who left it, because it's not enough to match to anyone including the person who left it!

If anyone who knows more about DNA please pipe up if what I'm saying could be true.


One thing for sure, the prosecuted who "exonerated" the Ramsey's based on the DNA was waaaayyyy out of line.

Some suspects have been "eliminated" due to no DNA match, but if the DNA is not reliable, the lot of them are all back in the running.
I'm thinking particularly about Helgoth. I mean how many suicide's leave a pillow with a gunshot through it? Duh!

Helgoth is the guy who is reported to have had a T-shirt with SBTC on it, and at his crime scene he left a pair of Hi-tec boots, and a Tazer.
But, his DNA was not a match so the police eliminated him from enquiries.

[louisa]

Helgoth had nothing to do with the Ramseys; he never worked for them and it appears that he had never heard of the existence of JBR before her death and never seemed interested in her murder, never seemed anxious about the case to anyone.

DNA evidence cleared both him and the boot print (MH's feet were a size and a half bigger than the size 8 print) and no trace of Helgoth was found in the house.

Helgoth was a druggie and would not have been able to get away with a crime like this without leaving a heck of a lot of evidence about himself scattered about - including DNA which would link him to the scene.

He collected baseball caps and they contained all kinds of logos.

PR's photographer friend Judith Phillips stated that she took a photo of Patsy with her gold cross in her mouth. Patsy told her that she had been "saved by the cross" Victory! (from cancer) and that's why she wanted the photo taken.

Because Helgoth was killed it makes him a convenient suspect as he can never be interrogated - more's the pity.

You have to feel sorry for his family - they don't deserve this.
.
.

[louisa]

PR's photographer friend Judith Phillips stated that she took a photo of Patsy with her gold cross in her mouth. Patsy told her that she had been "saved by the cross" Victory! (from cancer) and that's why she wanted the photo taken.

S.B.T.C. Victory!

.
.

[Wickerman]

DNA evidence cleared both him and the boot print....

But....you've already told everyone, the DNA evidence is worthless.

So which is it?
Do we trust the DNA or not?

[Wickerman]

PR's photographer friend Judith Phillips stated that she took a photo of Patsy with her gold cross in her mouth. Patsy told her that she had been "saved by the cross" Victory! (from cancer) and that's why she wanted the photo taken.

S.B.T.C. Victory!

.
.

Yes, I've read a number of whacky theories that end up meaning, Saved By The Cross.
So now you want to believe that Patsy chose to point directly to herself, knowing full well that she told the meaning to her closest friend?