Has JMK made you lean toward IDI

[tuppence]

While I have always leaned towards RDI, learning about JMK and his writings has made me more open to the IDI theory. He seemed crazy enough to do the erratic/inconsistent/far out things and yet smart/capable enough to pull it off. I still find the ransom note a stretch. I guess I could see someone as nuts as JMK writing a long rambling ransom note after accidentally killing her to possibly try to throw people in another direction. Maybe the person hoped to take her with him. JMK seems to be acting like he's in a movie...theatrical personality. The note was more drama.

Anyways - even though JMK is out - has this made anybody take the IDI possibility more seriously?

[Glow]

I already felt that it was an intruder. With Karr I hoped at first that he would be the one, but as the days wore on it got less and less likely :confused:

[Details]

I was already leaning that way, and Karr was an excellent example of the kind of person, precisely, that would have done this.

[sandraladeda]

After reading everything i can on this case, I have pretty much always been a RDI. When the Karr story broke, I opened my mind to the possibility that I was wrong. But nope, I wasn't! :rolleyes:

[aspidistra]

While I have always leaned towards RDI, learning about JMK and his writings has made me more open to the IDI theory. He seemed crazy enough to do the erratic/inconsistent/far out things and yet smart/capable enough to pull it off. I still find the ransom note a stretch. I guess I could see someone as nuts as JMK writing a long rambling ransom note after accidentally killing her to possibly try to throw people in another direction. Maybe the person hoped to take her with him. JMK seems to be acting like he's in a movie...theatrical personality. The note was more drama.

Anyways - even though JMK is out - has this made anybody take the IDI possibility more seriously?Ten years ago, I went with the Patsy did it scenario which was so promoted. Then when I saw the Lou Smit demonstration on tv about the window and the grate, I decided there could be an intruder. When Karr came on the scene he seeemed to fit the intruder theory so well. He explained a lot but he left some things unexplained. I don't know what to think now. He might well be clinically insane. It's all too strange and I am surprised the dna does not match, and wonder if that is a reason to throw out all the rest of the evidence including his detailed confession of events, without investigating them thoroughly.

I am curious as to when Lou Smit's demonstration of the grate and the window was first shown on TV. Could JK have seen it on TV? Before Smit, no one even noticed the window or grate or thought it was the entry point.

I just don't know how much of what he says is lies. Probably most of it. If so it's wasted the world's time for 2 weeks. If he did do it and just didn't leave his dna, well, that is even worse.

[Juliet10]

at first I was RDI when the only info I was getting was from leaked info from boulder spin team to the tabloids.

I changed to IDI when I took a closer look at the evidence. It's seems too implausible that the Ramseys would go to these crazy and elaborate extremes just to cover up an accident. If they wanted to cover up an accident, why not make it look like an accident? The police would've swept it under the rug and closed the case early on like they do with suicides especially it being a rich town involving rich prominent people. Look how quickly they swept the helgoth case under the rug. The cops were shorthanded and would've just called it an accident because there would be no way to prove otherwise. The Ramseys aren't crazy people or have a history of insane actions. There are a lot of crazy people in the world that do fit the bill for this crime and would do something like this like BTK, westerfield, richard allen davis, liz smart kidnapper and on and on.

So I'm still IDI.

[Chrishope]

I followed the case when it was new, and was RDI then. I didn't have a computer at the time.

3 or 4 years ago, I got interested again and looked up info on the net. The more I learned, the more RDI made sense to me. Because the case had gone cold, I stopped paying much attention to the matter.

I decided to look at the case again the day before Karr was arrested in Thailand. My reaction to the news was "Well, I guess I was wrong". But within hours he was reported to have said things that made no sense. Most of us were pretty sure his DNA wasn't going to match before he was tested.

To me Karr has simply reaffirmed my belief that the RDI theory best fits the evidence as we know it.

I don't believe PR killed JBR in a fit over bed wetting. I think the blow to the head came after strangulation. I think JR did it. PR helped with the cover-up.

I'm not one of those who can't immagine parents doing this to a child. The sad reality of life is that sometimes parents do such things.

I'm still open to the possibility of IDI, but each theory I read about IDI seems full of improbabilities.

[JDB]

When I heard about JMK arrest I knew he was not the one. To many things he stated in his e-mails to Tracey was known.I am still leaning that it is a RDI.The thing that bothers me if it was an IDI JonBenet would have screamed. But only the neighbors heard it? Now in the basement there are pipes that leads to the central air in the house. I remember when I was a kid my sisters an I would talk into the ducts from rooms to room.So if she screamed someone in the house would have heard.

[Texana]

I am apparently the only one who voted Still No Idea.

[gaia]

RDI! Always thought so. Gonna have to prove it BIG-TIME before I'll give up on that.

[chiquita2]

I always felt it was an intruder but I think it is/was someone in their sphere. A deliveryman, gas meter checker, gardener, neighbor. Someone that saw JonBenet often or someone that attended those beauty pagents in her area. This was not random. Its someone like Westerfield a la Van Dam case. I wonder how thoroughly they have checked out people like I mention above? Drives me crazy.

[LinasK]

I followed the case when it was new, and was RDI then. I didn't have a computer at the time.

3 or 4 years ago, I got interested again and looked up info on the net. The more I learned, the more RDI made sense to me. Because the case had gone cold, I stopped paying much attention to the matter.

I decided to look at the case again the day before Karr was arrested in Thailand. My reaction to the news was "Well, I guess I was wrong". But within hours he was reported to have said things that made no sense. Most of us were pretty sure his DNA wasn't going to match before he was tested.

To me Karr has simply reaffirmed my belief that the RDI theory best fits the evidence as we know it.

I don't believe PR killed JBR in a fit over bed wetting. I think the blow to the head came after strangulation. I think JR did it. PR helped with the cover-up.

I'm not one of those who can't immagine parents doing this to a child. The sad reality of life is that sometimes parents do such things.

I'm still open to the possibility of IDI, but each theory I read about IDI seems full of improbabilities.
I feel the same way Chrishope. This is a great poll question!

[JBean]

I was already leaning that way, and Karr was an excellent example of the kind of person, precisely, that would have done this.I feel similarly Details. I am an IDI and I think JMK could be a good representaiton of the real deal.

[sweetmop]

I've always thought an intruder was resposible.I always will. I tend to think in the same way as Chiquita2... it was someone who saw JBR often. With the type of lives the Ramseys led, I am sure they had available to them many coming in and out of their home and their life's often. I also feel it was someone who was always at the pageants and saw her, fantasized over her, etc.... just like the sick perv they drug in from Thailand.

[tuppence]

It's interesting to me that post JMK more people report changing to RDI then report changing to IDI. I would have expected the opposite.

It would be interesting to hear from people who voted that they now lean more toward RDI as to why.

[CaliKid]

I have see-sawed back and forth, but I think the Ramseys share some of the blame. I believe it was an accidental death (possibly by one or both of them) or they are at least guilty of covering it up.

[Peter Hamilton]

Well,its pretty simple--Since there was no evidence that any intruder entered the house( as JR stated to the BP that all the doors and windows were secured the night before,no shoeprints,no snowprints,no nothing,and the unbroken spider web at the basement window),then one must face the unpleasant truth that somebody inside did the dirty deed and wrote the moronic ransom note--its only logical

[Brutal Truth]

Well,its pretty simple--Since there was no evidence that any intruder entered the house( as JR stated to the BP that all the doors and windows were secured the night before,no shoeprints,no snowprints,no nothing,and the unbroken spider web at the basement window),then one must face the unpleasant truth that somebody inside did the dirty deed and wrote the moronic ransom note--its only logical

I agree 100%. No way an intruder could pull off all the things that took place in that house and there not be more evidence. Its simply just not possible.

[txsvicki]

Karr is the type of freak that I think could have committed this type of crime, but I think that there would have been more murders in the last ten years that might link the person back to the murder of JonBenet. This forum has provided so many convincing facts that it's hard not to think that a Ramsey/Patsy did it.

[chiquita2]

Brutal Truth, there was no evidence that Westerfield broke into the Van Dam's home either but he did and he was convicted of the murder and found evidence in his belongings. If the Boulder Police just had some clue who could have done it in the area and subjected some others to a search maybe they would have found something. I still think the Santa Claus guy looked pretty guilty.

[PaperDoll]

Well,its pretty simple--Since there was no evidence that any intruder entered the house( as JR stated to the BP that all the doors and windows were secured the night before,no shoeprints,no snowprints,no nothing,and the unbroken spider web at the basement window),then one must face the unpleasant truth that somebody inside did the dirty deed and wrote the moronic ransom note--its only logical

I'm all for logic.. I don't believe the intruder theory.. never have...

[Brutal Truth]

Brutal Truth, there was no evidence that Westerfield broke into the Van Dam's home either but he did and he was convicted of the murder and found evidence in his belongings. If the Boulder Police just had some clue who could have done it in the area and subjected some others to a search maybe they would have found something. I still think the Santa Claus guy looked pretty guilty.
Did he screw around in the house like this supposed intruder? No.

There are way to many things this intruder had to do in the ramseys house that night. And it just isnt believeable.

Oh and the Boulder Police had an idea who did it and they lived in the house.

[SleuthingSleuth]

Since the Karr fiasco my eyes have remained upon the Ramseys still.

In terms of IDI theory, the following hard questions come to mind:

1. How did the intruder get into the house? How did he get out?

2. Why was this intruder so comfortable in being in a house for so long with 3 people sleeping in it? He certainly was lucky to come on a night when the dog was gone.

3. Why didn't he kidnap Jonbenet?

4. How did this intruder feed Jonbenet pineapple shortly before her death?

5. Why be so careful as to leave no prints, footprints, DNA, or fibers...yet leave behind a sample of his handwriting in a way too personal ransom note to John Ramsey?

[LaMer]

I can't refrain myself ;)

:waitasec: Cause there wasn't an intruder@the Ramsey house.

[SlowBoatToChina]

No intruder. Just a very tragic, weird familial accident on an emotionally explosive day. When the stuff of Christmas “magic” and expectations was supposed to happen, the reality of no flying reindeer and the absence of movie effects made for a deadly reality. Inside job, all the way…

[tumble]

I am still RDI. I am not totally convinced though, therefore I hang around here and try to learn more.
As I believe at the moment that it was an accident my main problem is why not just call 911.

And if they chose to coverup an accident, Juliet10's question
If they wanted to cover up an accident, why not make it look like an accident? is very bothersome.

To answer these questions the R's either did it on purpose which I can't make myself believe or the R's can't even let an accident blemish their rep which I also find hard to believe but at the moment accepts.
Another answer is that one parent actually managed to fool the other. I think maybe JR wasn't in on it at all. Trying to fool the other parent can explain alot of the strange staging.

Regarding IDI I have an even harder time making the facts fit,
to me LS's basement window doesn't 'sit well'(pun intended...) and the actions by the possible intruder is just to strange an contradictive.

[Chrishope]

Since the Karr fiasco my eyes have remained upon the Ramseys still.

In terms of IDI theory, the following hard questions come to mind:

1. How did the intruder get into the house? How did he get out?

2. Why was this intruder so comfortable in being in a house for so long with 3 people sleeping in it? He certainly was lucky to come on a night when the dog was gone.

3. Why didn't he kidnap Jonbenet?

4. How did this intruder feed Jonbenet pineapple shortly before her death?

5. Why be so careful as to leave no prints, footprints, DNA, or fibers...yet leave behind a sample of his handwriting in a way too personal ransom note to John Ramsey?

The part about the dog keeps coming back to me too. An hypothetical intruder would have had to know the dog was with neighbors - indicating he knew the family, or else he just got very lucky.

[kazzbar]

It's interesting to me that post JMK more people report changing to RDI then report changing to IDI. I would have expected the opposite.

It would be interesting to hear from people who voted that they now lean more toward RDI as to why.I am leaning more to RDI now because of the DNA.I think if a intruder did it there would have been some DNA left inside that house or on JBR.I always thought that LE was holding a big card of hidden evidence, now we know they know little more than us. I am also suspicious of Ramsay friends also but would not rule out JAR either.
No justice will be found because the main player is gone.

[IrishMist]

I am still RDI. I am not totally convinced though, therefore I hang around here and try to learn more.

As I believe at the moment that it was an accident my main problem is why not just call 911.

And if they chose to coverup an accident, Juliet10's question

If they wanted to cover up an accident, why not make it look like an accident?

is very bothersome.

To answer these questions the R's either did it on purpose which I can't make myself believe or the R's can't even let an accident blemish their rep which I also find hard to believe but at the moment accept.

Another answer is that one parent actually managed to fool the other. I think maybe JR wasn't in on it at all. Trying to fool the other parent can explain alot of the strange staging.

Regarding IDI I have an even harder time making the facts fit,
to me LS's basement window doesn't 'sit well'(pun intended...) and the actions by the possible intruder is just to strange an contradictive.Well, Tumble, it's as if you've crawled into my head. These are the circles I find myself going in, still, all these years later. I just can't come up with a scenario that I feel comfortable with. Whenever I come close to deciding, I get those doubts- what about this, or what about that? I can't see in my mind's eye a coherant, logical, fits-the-facts replay of what happened that night. Makes me crazy.

[rashomon]

I have always been convinced that the Ramseys were involved in JB's death. For there is just too much forensic and other evidence pointing to them: the fibers, the loose ligatures, the bogus garrote, the duct tape put on the dead child's mouth, the Ramseys' total non-cooperation with the police right from the start, their many lies, and of course the biggest piece of incriminatiing evidence: the ransom note written on pen and paper from the Ramsey home, eerily resembling Patsy's handwriting, reflecting her personality and showing that the writer had a personal relationship with John.
Even if John Karr's DNA had been a match, my theory would have changed toward the Ramseys must have been in this together with him, and covering up.

[Nuisanceposter]

Lol, Rashomon, me too! I'll never be convinced the Rs weren't part of this.

[christine2448]

Still have no flippin' idea! I am still on the fence, teeter/totter, read one post and lean towards RDI, read another post, lean towards IDI. I have been leaning heavily for a long time towards IDI, but still haven't fallen on that side of the fence totally yet.

[Old Broad]

I'm still a IDI, now that it's been almost 10 years I don't know if it will ever be solved, I would hope it could but it will have to take a miracle. Will there ever be justice for JonBenet? Even if whoever murdered her would be caught, how can there be any real justice? She'll still be a dead little girl.
One thing that's always bothered me is the report of her saying she was going to be getting a visit from someone. I could see where someone known to her could lure her downstairs for a surprise, even all the way down to the basement before things went wrong. She did eat pineapple, it happens to be something she liked very much, that also speaks to me that it was someone who knew her. Many people had keys to the house, it would have been very easy to get a copy made.
Everything has been so overly analized, every small item looked so closely under the microscope that everybody looks guilty. Yes Patsy had her faults, she was a stage mother, she's guilty of wanting her daughter to look and act pretty instead of learning how to read. In time I believe JonBenet would have resisted more and stopped the pagents just like the other girl who was shown on TV a few nights ago, (Thumper) she and JonBenet were in a pagent together and formed a friendship, she showed off her crowns she'd won until she quit doing it at age 11. Yes JR was a reserved business man who was not home much, seems to me that if he was sexually involved with his daughter then he would have been around more not less. Yes there was an older brother who at age 9 I do not believe would have the know how to stage some type of "play" gone bad. If a mother found JonBenet's battered body with Burke standing over her, her first reaction would be to get help fast, call 911 before ever being able to see if she was already dead.
If the Ramseys knew JonBenet was dead and needed to cover it up they could have stuck to their original plan and flown out of state the next day, bringing with them the body. That would have gotten them away from the crime scene, given them time to plan and cover things up. If there was going to be a staged kidnapping, it could have been done up in Michigan, they could have in the meanwhile had JonBenet buried somewhere and she just never be found.
Who killed JonBenet? I don't know, maybe it was an overly obsessive stage mother who also had a little girl in the pagents and was upset because JonBenet won a crown she felt should have gone to her daughter! Or maybe it was a cunning preditor who was able to get inside the home and manage to get her down to the basement while everyone else was asleep. It happened on a night when the dog was out of the house, the Ramseys would not have needed it to be a night when the dog was gone but an intruder would. They were leaving the next morning on vacation, the preditor needed to strike before it would be to late! Like Karr IMO it is someone who puts themself in a position of being around children and JonBenet is not their only victim.

OB

[less0305]

I have always been convinced that the Ramseys were involved in JB's death. For there is just too much forensic and other evidence pointing to them: the fibers, the loose ligatures, the bogus garrote, the duct tape put on the dead child's mouth, the Ramseys' total non-cooperation with the police right from the start, their many lies, and of course the biggest piece of incriminatiing evidence: the ransom note eerily resembling Patsy's handwriting, reflecting her personlity and showing that the writer had a personal relationship with John.
Even if John Karr's DNA had been a match, my theory would have changed toward the Ramseys must have been in this together with him, and covering up.

When JMK came to light my first thought also was "Wonder how JMK and the Ramseys are connected," because I, too, would have believed that they were still involved with the murder and somehow tied to Karr. I have that much belief that the Ramseys (one or the other or both) were the perpetrators in this tragedy - and that both were involved in the staging/coverup.

[GuruJosh]

i suspect that a Ramsey did it, because (like a previous poster mentioned), every single one of the IDI theories is full of improbabilities.

However the JMK thing taught me that i might be wrong... and i was actually hoping he would prove to be the one, since i am (to a certain extent) sick of this case... it is simply too perplexing.

however it would not surprise me if the whole thing was orchestrated by the CO prof with the tactical/strategic approval of John.. who came across like a saint when he said that JMK should be presumed innocent. It may all fit into his master plan of making himself look like a victim (which he may indeed be), and will certainly make him more electable...

[LinasK]

Yes Patsy had her faults, she was a stage mother, she's guilty of wanting her daughter to look and act pretty instead of learning how to read. In time I believe JonBenet would have resisted more and stopped the pagents just like the other girl who was shown on TV a few nights ago, (Thumper) she and JonBenet were in a pagent together and formed a friendship, she showed off her crowns she'd won until she quit doing it at age 11.

Who killed JonBenet? I don't know, maybe it was an overly obsessive stage mother who also had a little girl in the pagents and was upset because JonBenet won a crown she felt should have gone to her daughter! OB
Sorry, this made me laugh, we're not talking Texas Cheerleader Mother here!

[Old Broad]

Sorry, this made me laugh, we're not talking Texas Cheerleader Mother here!

Glad you had a laugh LinasK :)
Yes that is a pretty bizare script and not one I put out there seriously but then I doubt the people in Texas ever saw that one coming. What ever happened to that woman is she still in prison?

OB

[Wrenbird]

I have always belived the Ramsey's were involved. The only thing that gives me the slighest doubt (and I do mean slight) is how in the world could Patsy Ramsey compose herself to write that ransom note? If it were my child dead, I would be wailing, screaming, in a panic, and there is no way I would even be able to hold a pen, much less write a compostion.

[exoromeo]

No intruder. One of the Ramsey's did it (likely Patsy, IMHO...accident maybe, then staged, but still Patsy with John helping cover it up).

[Chrishope]

f the Ramseys knew JonBenet was dead and needed to cover it up they could have stuck to their original plan and flown out of state the next day, bringing with them the body. That would have gotten them away from the crime scene, given them time to plan and cover things up. If there was going to be a staged kidnapping, it could have been done up in Michigan, they could have in the meanwhile had JonBenet buried somewhere and she just never be found.

JR wasn't flying the plane. They had a pilot. They'd have had to explain to him why JBR was dead and why they were taking her body to Michigan.

[SuperDave]

I'm with rashomon 100%

[MysteryAddict]

I believe both Ramsey's were involved.

[Zelda]

Brutal Truth, there was no evidence that Westerfield broke into the Van Dam's home either but he did and he was convicted of the murder and found evidence in his belongings. If the Boulder Police just had some clue who could have done it in the area and subjected some others to a search maybe they would have found something. I still think the Santa Claus guy looked pretty guilty.

It wasn't brought out in the trial but later I heard Brenda VD say that they think DW hid in the shower near Danielle's room, until it was quiet enough to carry her out. Brenda alo said she thinks he may have hidden in the shower, on other occasions, before he kidnapped Danielle

What do IDI and JDI mean? Intruder did it? Ramseys did it? I never have known for sure.

[Nuisanceposter]

IDI - intruder did it
RDI - Ramsey did it
JDI - John did it
PDI - Patsy did it
BDI - Burke did it

et cetera.

[poco]

I voted RDI - although I believe either RDI together, JRDI alone or PRDI alone, I almost 100% believe PRWTRN!!!

[Juliet10]

Did he screw around in the house like this supposed intruder? No.

There are way to many things this intruder had to do in the ramseys house that night. And it just isnt believeable.

Oh and the Boulder Police had an idea who did it and they lived in the house.
They have evidence that points away from the Ramseys. The police that don't like the intruder theory don't like that evidence. They continue to poo poo it or explain it away. I also don't beleive they collected all the evidence. They weren't looking for an intruder. They wanted to hang Patsy. They didn't collect everything they were suppose to or do the job properly. They were inexperienced people on the case. Steve Thomas was totally biased and likely corrupt too. Who knows what might have happened to evidence. Most of the place was contaminated and compromised or ruined.

There was no evidence in the Jaclyn Dowaliby killing either. In fact the prosecution expert said the window was broken inside. The prosecutors and detectives don't like evidence that points away from their theory. They want that evidence to "go away". That is why Thomas says White opened the basement window. They use excuses like, "that has nothing to do with the case", so they ignore it. So they either don't bother collecting it or it goes "missing".

[SleuthingSleuth]

They have evidence that points away from the Ramseys. The police that don't like the intruder theory don't like that evidence. They continue to poo poo it or explain it away. I also don't beleive they collected all the evidence. They weren't looking for an intruder. They wanted to hang Patsy. They didn't collect everything they were suppose to or do the job properly. They were inexperienced people on the case. Steve Thomas was totally biased and likely corrupt too. Who knows what might have happened to evidence. Most of the place was contaminated and compromised or ruined.

There was no evidence in the Jaclyn Dowaliby killing either. In fact the prosecution expert said the window was broken inside. The prosecutors and detectives don't like evidence that points away from their theory. They want that evidence to "go away". That is why Thomas says White opened the basement window. They use excuses like, "that has nothing to do with the case", so they ignore it. So they either don't bother collecting it or it goes "missing".
What is the evidence there was there was an intruder in the house?
How did he get in, and how did he get out?
What was his intention in going into the house?
As well, why was he so comfortable in the house, and fearless of the alarm warnings? He even got lucky in coming on a night when the dog wasn't around.

It seems to me having pulled this crime off perfectly, such a person would not stop at just one. Are there any similar cases featuring such a fearless intruder who does not leave any traces of himself behind?

[Nuisanceposter]

Absolutely, SS. Anyone who broke into a house and successfully pulled off a crime of this magnitude would not have stopped afterwards. An intruder who feels as comfortable in the home he's invading as this guy did does not exist.

I mean, think about it...what makes more sense - that some intruder found a way into the Ramsey house, woke JonBenet up, fed her pineapple, waited around for an hour or so before he hit her on the head, assaulted her vaginally, and strangled her, cleaned her up, redressed her, then wrote an obviously fake ransom note, and left without leaving behind any forensic evidence that he was there - or a parent accidentally hit JB, staged an intruder scene complete with strangling, and wrote an obviously fake ransom note comfortable in their own home?

And don't forget - fibers from the clothing both John and Patsy wore that evening were found in the crime scene and on the body. Either the intruder wore J & P's clothes or the Ramseys are liars.

[Peter Hamilton]

SleuthingSleuth,you are asking very pertinent questions in this case but no IDI theorist has bothered to answer you---I wonder why :)

[Jolynna]

To know that the dog wasn't gonna be around that night, find the right bedroom, to have the family information to put in the ransom note, to know where Burke's pocket knife was to cut the rope, to know that the alarm was not working, to know so many things the murderer had to know, any intruder would have to know more about the Ramseys than that they had a cute daughter.

Any intruder would HAVE to be part of the Ramsey's lives. No one, up until a couple of weeks ago ever thought otherwise. Every article, year after year said that the killer was either someone in the family or someone who was VERY close to them.

[GuruJosh]

Are there any similar cases featuring such a fearless intruder who does not leave any traces of himself behind?
Yep - OJ Simpson ;)

[Peter Hamilton]

OJ--lol--I remember watching Montell Williams show a few years ago--Dr. Henry Lee was on---Montell seemed to think OJ's blood wasn't there--and then Lee stated DNA proved OJ's blood was indeed there--his blood was at the crime scene--poor montell then sort of stammered,first time montell was at a loss for words--guess he thought because Lee testified for the defense,Lee wouldn't confirm OJ's blood was at the crime scene--too funny

[rashomon]

Yep - OJ Simpson ;)
And Jeffrey MacDonald claimed that there had been at least six intruders who slaughtered his whole family, but oh wonder, none of those alleged assailants left a shred of forensic evidence behind. No DNA, no fingerprints, no fibers - nothing. The grim truth is that the only assailant present in his house on that fatal night on Feb 17/1970 was Jeffrey MacDonald himself.