Where are the experts?

[Nedthan Johns]

Why are there NO experts weighing in on this so called new "TOUCH DNA" technology. Where is Dr. Henry Lee?

Why is Mary Lacy once again being allowed to make public statements exonerating the Ramsey's when this is still an OPEN investigation?

Why is the community and citizens of Boulder not outraged at the ineptness of the Boulder's DA's office?

Why is it that the media takes Lacy's statements and runs with it without asking the obvious?

How does a district attorney with no scientific background conclude that this DNA belongs to the killer? How does the DNA match conclusively if the strand found in her panties was contaiminated and produced incomplete markers? How does Lacy know the Ramsey's didn't have anyone over to that house? If an intruder got there, so could a friend, alley, or someone who helped cover the crime.

Where is Lou Smit and what's his comment? Where is detective Steve Thomas?

[Nedthan Johns]

For all: Please post all relevent news articles and weblinks to this site. Stories only please, so we can keep up, otherwise they get buried in posts.

[Nedthan Johns]

Denver Post
http://origin.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_9839651

CNN
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/10/ramsey.dna/index.html

[Nedthan Johns]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/10/ramsey.dna/index.html#cnnSTCVideo
Good Morning America. Lin Wood says "this is a DNA case"

Other videos follow

[Nedthan Johns]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/10/ramsey.dna/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

Notice in this clip when John states, we couldn't have possibly been involved, how his eyes shift and he looks down. I am just noticing his body jestures. This is a very long interview with John

[Nedthan Johns]

Mary Lacy in the above interview tells John how very important it is to pay attention to the facts. How did she base the fact that this DNA belongs to the killer?

[Nedthan Johns]

http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/rockytalklive/archives/2008/07/lacy_clears_family_in_jon_bene.html

The way to get CNN and other news sources to print accurate facts is to write them with your comments.

[Nedthan Johns]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/10/earlyshow/main4247767.shtml
The Early Show

[Nedthan Johns]

http://www.drhenrylee.com/index.shtml



Folks, get involved. E-mail Dr. Lee for answers. After all he was the one that stated this was NOT A DNA CASE.

I am curious as to how he feels about this new evidence. Flood his site with injuries. Demand the experts to talk!!!

[Medea]

I no longer consider Henry Lee or Michael Baden credible in the least.

THere is no way to tell when they are lying or when they are giving their truthful professional appearance...you can only sell your 'expert opinion' to the highest bidder so many times before you can't be trusted.

[Love_Mama]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,379981,00.html

Jeffrey Scott Shapiro: DA Wrong to Clear Ramseys
Thursday, July 10, 2008
By Jeffrey Scott Shapiro

Boulder District Attorney Mary Lacy on Wednesday publicly cleared the entire Ramsey family of any involvement in the murder of JonBenet Ramsey, a fatal error that only complements the repeated misjudgments she has made in the case since she was elected.

Her decision was based on the fact that minuscule particles of foreign DNA that were found in JonBenet’s underpants apparently match skin cells discovered on the waistband of JonBenet’s leggings. Although this DNA may match, Lacy’s own words prove this particular DNA may not even be relevant.

MORE AT LINK ABOVE.

XXXXXXXOOO
MAMA
:blowkiss::blowkiss:

[Nedthan Johns]

Thank you for that link. I believe Fox News may have restored my faith in accurate journalism.

[Nedthan Johns]

It’s no secret that in 1997, when Lacy was a sex-assault prosecutor under then-DA Alex Hunter, she was furious when he did not appoint her to work on the case. Because Hunter and the police shied away from the intruder theory, many law enforcement officials often wonder if Lacy’s attempts to prove them wrong are driven more by her personal feelings than by the actual pursuit of justice.

Shortly after taking office, Lacy announced in 2003 that she believed the Ramseys were innocent, an unusual and inappropriate statement for a prosecutor to make during an ongoing investigation.


The above is from the Fox News Report by Jeff Shapiro.

[RiverRat]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,379981,00.html

Jeffrey Scott Shapiro: DA Wrong to Clear Ramseys
Thursday, July 10, 2008
By Jeffrey Scott Shapiro

Boulder District Attorney Mary Lacy on Wednesday publicly cleared the entire Ramsey family of any involvement in the murder of JonBenet Ramsey, a fatal error that only complements the repeated misjudgments she has made in the case since she was elected.

Her decision was based on the fact that minuscule particles of foreign DNA that were found in JonBenet’s underpants apparently match skin cells discovered on the waistband of JonBenet’s leggings. Although this DNA may match, Lacy’s own words prove this particular DNA may not even be relevant.

MORE AT LINK ABOVE.

XXXXXXXOOO
MAMA
:blowkiss::blowkiss:

Shapiro?! Great find, LoveMama - many thanks!

"Almost nothing Lacy has done has been based on the solid, investigative work compiled by the Boulder Police Department or the opinions expressed by the FBI. Lacy, who had no official contact with the Ramsey case under the leadership of Hunter, has disregarded the opinions of every law enforcement agency and forensic expert who worked on the case.

Her arrogance and incompetence is beyond compare.

Despite her repeated attempts to convince the public that her belief is grounded in the highly respected science of DNA, it appears that her rationale is flawed. If Lacy were serious about solving the Ramsey case, she would re-invite the original police investigators and FBI agents, who know the case inside and out, to come back and advise her.

She’ll never do that, however, because for Mary Lacy none of this really is about JonBenet — it’s about her legacy and her ego.

Jeffrey Scott Shapiro is an investigative reporter who worked on the JonBenet Ramsey case for more than 10 years. He practices law in Washington, D.C., and can be reached at jshapiro@ufl.edu.

[Nedthan Johns]

http://www.bouldercounty.org/da/index.htm

Boulder DA's office

[LinasK]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/10/ramsey.dna/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

Notice in this clip when John states, we couldn't have possibly been involved, how his eyes shift and he looks down. I am just noticing his body jestures. This is a very long interview with John

That's the body language of a liar. Scott Peterson did the same thing in his interviews with Diane Sawyer prior to his arrest.

[trixie]

WOW! Thank you LoveMama for that link. What a scathing article on Mary Lacy! See? I said in another post somewhere that they would start coming out and writing opinions about what she did. I think this faux (paugh heehee)of hers is really going to come back and bite her on the a$$ HARD! I'm looking forward to more of these. I think there are a lot of people that have been waiting to voice their opinion about Lacy and how she's handled this case.

[RiverRat]

I know that we are ALL Know It Alls here.......but just in case, a casual case follower is reading, Jeff Shapiro was the reporter from the tabloids that wormed his way deep into the heart of the investigation and knows far more than he should......but, because of his involvement, we also know more than we should about this case so I do trust his opinion on this matter.

[MrsMush99]

I know that we are ALL Know It Alls here.......but just in case, a casual case follower is reading, Jeff Shapiro was the reporter from the tabloids that wormed his way deep into the heart of the investigation and knows far more than he should......but, because of his involvement, we also know more than we should about this case so I do trust his opinion on this matter.

I just read his article. It is very informative. I think I'll have to google what else he has to say. I'm guessing he thinks the Ramsey's are guilty right?

[Ciara]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25629128/
Thought this article may be of interest.

[RiverRat]

I just read his article. It is very informative. I think I'll have to google what else he has to say. I'm guessing he thinks the Ramsey's are guilty right?

He seems to now.

[ttrachel04]

i saw an expert on CNNHeadline today. i think she had been on Nancy Grace last night.

[RiverRat]

Dan Abrams MSNBC Transcript - July 9, 2008

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=9279

Kane: Oh, I think that there is no question that someone who wrote it didn’t intend to collect a $118,000 ransom. The other thing that strikes me is, your other guest talking about he would advise the DA… There’s so much urban legend out there about what the facts of this case are. An example is what he just said about there being a footprint being at the base of a window. There is no footprint at the base of a window! There’s so many things that have been put out and speculated about in the public domain. And all I am saying is, those people who have researched all the evidence in this case have reached a certain conclusion in the DA’s office, now. Other people who have been accessed to all the evidence in this case are not so convinced. That’s not to say that there is a particular person that you could name. Given all the evidence that’s still out there, that hasn’t been explained I would not say any body has been exonerated in this case.

[SuperDave]

I just read his article. It is very informative. I think I'll have to google what else he has to say. I'm guessing he thinks the Ramsey's are guilty right?

After a long time of saying he thought they were innocent, MrsMush. Like me, in some ways.

I believe Fox News may have restored my faith in accurate journalism.

Boy, there's something you don't read every day!

[trixie]

Dan Abrams MSNBC Transcript - July 9, 2008

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=9279

Kane: Oh, I think that there is no question that someone who wrote it didn’t intend to collect a $118,000 ransom. The other thing that strikes me is, your other guest talking about he would advise the DA… There’s so much urban legend out there about what the facts of this case are. An example is what he just said about there being a footprint being at the base of a window. There is no footprint at the base of a window! There’s so many things that have been put out and speculated about in the public domain. And all I am saying is, those people who have researched all the evidence in this case have reached a certain conclusion in the DA’s office, now. Other people who have been accessed to all the evidence in this case are not so convinced. That’s not to say that there is a particular person that you could name. Given all the evidence that’s still out there, that hasn’t been explained I would not say any body has been exonerated in this case.


Oh Lordy! There is so much we still do not know about this case! How the hell could Mary Lacy CLEAR ANYBODY!!!
Jeez, I think I need to go smoke something and eat a cake.

[Credence]

Originally published 07:23 p.m., July 10, 2008
Updated 07:23 p.m., July 10, 2008

A high-profile forensic investigator who worked on the JonBenet Ramsey case said Thursday that he doesn’t think — when it comes to finding the 6-year-old girl’s killer — that much has changed in the Boulder County district attorney’s investigation.

District Attorney Mary Lacy on Wednesday announced new DNA evidence in JonBenet’s 1996 slaying, cleared her parents as suspects and wrote them an apology letter.

But investigator Henry Lee, who has worked on homicides including the O.J. Simpson and John F. Kennedy cases, said John and Patsy Ramsey already were cleared in their daughter’s death nearly a decade ago when a grand jury failed to find evidence to indict anyone.

As for the DNA, Lee said, evidence in the national database today is the same DNA that’s been there for years.

“So far they have not had a hit,” Lee said.

Investigators exonerated JonBenet’s family this week after learning that new DNA evidence found on long johns the girl was wearing at the time of her death matched foreign DNA discovered 11 years ago in her underwear.

Until now, some people speculated the DNA in the panties — because it never has matched any suspects — might have landed there innocently, perhaps through a factory worker who packaged the panties. The corroborating evidence found on the girl’s long johns recently gives investigators supportive proof that the DNA on the underwear didn’t land there innocuously.

http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2008/jul/10/forensic-expert-says-ramsey-investigation-still-co/

[Love_Mama]

Blogs - Post-Ed Notes

Anger won’t clear Ramseys
by David Harsanyi on July 11, 2008

http://blogs.denverpost.com/opinion/2008/07/11/anger-wont-clear-ramseys/


I’ve received a ton of responses to Thursday’s column which focused on the despicable behavior of Boulder DA Mary Lacy and her dubious “clearing” and apology to the Ramseys. Around 75 percent of the emails and calls I received were supportive.

In a world crawling with batty conspiracy theorists, I ran across a particularly mind-numbing post by a fringy blowhard named “Dr. Sammy“. It’s a nearly unreadable tirade full of ad hominem attacks and baseless assertions.

The only reason I mention “Dr. Sammy” is that he, like others who are emotionally invested in seeing the Ramseys cleared, have held up the work of Professor Michael Tracey as the exemplar of fairness and professionalism in the Ramsey case. Yes, the same Michael Tracey brought us the mentally unstable John Mark Karr as the fall guy on his never-ending crusade to exonerate the Ramseys. For more on Tracey, read Alan Prendergast and Michael Roberts in Westword.

I don’t know Tracey personally, though I may have met him at some point, and he may be the finest professor in Colorado. What I do know, however, is that his actions during the Karr fiasco disqualify him from being the go-to guy on the topic.

To be frank, the rehashing of the JonBenet case is, for the most part, a worthless endeavor. (One commenter on the DPO claims that I have, like radio talk show host Peter Boyles, been “harping” on this topic for years. I’m not sure what Peter has done; I wasn’t here. But in approximately 400+ columns I’ve written for the Post since 2004, I’ve editorialized on the case twice. Once when Karr was brought in and once on Thursday.)

The focus here is Mary Lacy’s irresponsible, unprofessional and hypocritical behavior. For anyone who still doubts Lacy’s breathtaking incompetence, peruse these quotes from a piece by Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, who was an investigative reporter on the case. (Yes, I realize Shapiro has his own bias, but the Lacy quotes speak for themselves.)

In 2006, after Lacy extradited John Mark Karr, an otherwise innocent man, from Thailand, to erroneously charge him with the murder, she announced: “The DNA could be an artifact. It isn’t necessarily the killer’s. There’s a probability that it’s the killer’s. But it could be something else.

And …

In fact, during the Karr debacle, Lacy also said that “no one is really cleared of a homicide until there’s a conviction in court, beyond a reasonable doubt. And I don’t think you will get any prosecutor, unless they were present with the person at the time of the crime, to clear someone.

What has changed for Lacy? If she didn’t know then that the DNA was the killer’s, how does she know it now? If DNA was there, finding a trace amount in another spot doesn’t change any facts. Nor does it “clear” the Ramseys.

xxxxxxxoooo
mama
:blowkiss::blowkiss:

[Love_Mama]

Updated: July 10, 2008 6:45:38 PM MDT

http://www.denverpost.com/harsanyi

opinion
There's only one victim in the Ramsey case
By David Harsanyi
Article Last Updated: 07/10/2008 06:45:38 PM MDT

Ramsey case DNA awaits match in federal database
"Touch DNA" a relatively new analysis

12-year-old murder case likely to top DA's legacy
DA clears Ramsey family

Despite what you may have heard, Patsy and John Ramsey have not been "cleared" of wrongdoing in any genuine sense. They were simply handed a legal pass by a staunch ally who has once again shortchanged the genuine victim in the case: JonBenét.

Mary Lacy, the district attorney of Boulder, has made it her mission to exonerate the Ramseys since her first day on the job. She has disregarded facts and played the media and the public for a bunch of suckers along the way. She is trying to do it again.

Relying on an advanced method of analyzing forensic evidence, Lacy claims an unidentified man was the likely murderer of JonBenét. Lacy stated the Ramsey family should now "be treated only as victims," and apologized to them in writing.

Lacy, as anyone who has followed this case knows, has little credibility to offer, much less any absolution to hand out — at least not until a killer is convicted. And without a confession, that's an exceedingly unlikely scenario.

The Ramseys, let's not forget, brought suspicion upon themselves with bizarre behavior during the investigation of the horrific Christmas night 1996 murder of their daughter.
Suspicious acts are not the equivalent of guilt, but they certainly provide authorities ample reason to be on alert.

Now, according to Lacy, an outside laboratory has found "previously undiscovered genetic material" of a male in three places on JonBenét's clothing. This leads investigators to believe that DNA could not have been left accidentally by an innocent party. It must have been an intruder.
So, once again, the public is supposed to believe a murderer snuck into the house undetected, killed the girl undetected, wrote a ransom note and then snuck out undetected, never to be heard from again.

"It is, therefore, the position of the Boulder district attorney's office that this profile belongs to the perpetrator of the homicide," Lacy contends.

Now, you may wonder:
How does Lacy know the unidentified male is the one who actually killed JonBenét? How does Lacy know that this person's hands weren't on JonBenét's clothes before or after the murder? How does she know that John Doe wasn't assisting the family in a cover-up of the crime?
And if this nameless individual was indeed the murderer, how does Lacy know that a family member did not assist him in covering up the crime?
She doesn't know.

But Lacy, one of the most incompetent officials working in Colorado law enforcement, has taken us on this ride before. There is neither the space nor the need to discuss Lacy's ham-fisted ineptitude here. She is, after all, an elected official, and Boulder voters get what they deserve.

We must, nonetheless, recall that this is the woman who two years ago conceded she had not a shred of credible evidence tying John Mark Karr to the death of JonBenét Ramsey. Yet, she still hauled this creepy child-sex fetishist back to United States from Thailand (a crime in itself, if you ask me) and let citizens foot the bill.
When Karr was brought back to Colorado, there were immediate calls for the media to ask for forgiveness from the Ramsey family for daring to cast suspicion on them all these years.
But, as is always prudent in this case, a healthy dose of skepticism about the Boulder police department, the DA and everyone involved was entirely justified — for the obvious reasons that no one wants to believe the unthinkable. No one wants to believe parents are capable of some dreadful act.
We should also remember there are plenty of other crimes to be solved. Plenty of other children — most of whom aren't involved in high-profile cases — are in need of justice.
But Lacy is in no position to offer apologies or to dictate how the public should view the Ramseys. Because in this case, there is still only one victim.
Reach columnist David Harsanyi at 303-954-1255 or dharsanyi@

denverpost.com.

xxxxoo
mama
:blowkiss::blowkiss: