1832 users online (332 members and 1500 guests)  


The Killing Season - Websleuths

Websleuths News

View Poll Results: If the was no foreign DNA, where would you stand

Voters
62. You may not vote on this poll
  • Still an IDI

    38 61.29%
  • No idea.

    6 9.68%
  • I would turn RDI

    18 29.03%

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 56
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    579

    A DNA poll for IDIs

    I think I am starting to see how the IDIs here think

    No single piece of evidence is strong enough to pin a R down on its's own.

    But then why don't you guys end up in the 'i don't know' group?

    No single piece of evidence is strong enough to pin an intruder down on it's own.

    Or is the DNA it?
    If there was no foreign DNA would you have changed your mind on the case?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Lone Star State
    Posts
    6,295
    Quote Originally Posted by tumble
    I think I am starting to see how the IDIs here think

    No single piece of evidence is strong enough to pin a R down on its's own.

    But then why don't you guys end up in the 'i don't know' group?

    No single piece of evidence is strong enough to pin an intruder down on it's own.

    Or is the DNA it?
    If there was no foreign DNA would you have changed your mind on the case?

    I'd still be sitting on the fence.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    7,119
    I would lean more towards the Ramseys.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    579
    Oh, sorry there are no choice for you fence sitters. Another poll another day.

    But please feel free to voice your opinion.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    494
    To me the DNA means virtually nothing. The minuscule amount of DNA found in her underpants could have been left there by a sneezing, coughing, spittle-prone underwear factory worker. And if that is the case, that DNA cannot be used to exclude anyone from involvement. The DNA under her fingernails was compromised by the use of one clipper rather than 10. So my confidence in that DNA, even if they get a partial match, is shaky at best.

    If the DNA does not match, Karr cannot be excluded in my opinion because of the two reasons I listed above. Something else will have to exclude him, like hard proof that he was not in Colorado that night.

    My reasoning for believing in an intruder is the evidence around the window well, the shoeprint, and the 911 tape. One of my stongest feelings though revolves around the parents (or parent) being able to stage a kidnapping/murder scene effectively, come up with some weird and totally unnecessary ransom note situation, and write an intelligible ransom note after just killing their own child. I would think that the fear of being caught combined with the (presumably) unexpected murder and the grief associated with a dead child would have caused them to mess up. Leave some sign that obviously implicated themselves. But, if they did it, the Ramseys staged the perfect crime scene. In my opinion, that would have been impossible.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    I'm still IDI because I believe there is an ideal suspect. A sadist, obsession with movies, drinker, hard times, etc., who actually writes and uses expressions just like the RN. An experienced kidnapper and killer, who had help. A very angry, vengeful, disturbed, violent person who would make JK look like a petty thief. A person who actually ends their letters with a revolutionary salutation.

    Many believe that the killer left no forensic evidence, when the RN is a ton of forensic evidence. Right away, RDI had to make a claim that the handwriting is disguised, which allows almost any analysis to find subtle matches.

    Remember the disguised handwriting claim is just a claim at this time. There's no proof that the handwriting is disguised, yet RDI is completely dependent on this idea.

    The ideal suspect's handwriting will be a ringer.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Central Fla - Orlando area
    Posts
    803

    Cool Yes - DNA is important to my opinion ...

    Quote Originally Posted by tumble

    I think I am starting to see how the IDIs here think

    No single piece of evidence is strong enough to pin a R down on its's own.

    But then why don't you guys end up in the 'i don't know' group?

    No single piece of evidence is strong enough to pin an intruder down on it's own.

    Or is the DNA it?
    If there was no foreign DNA would you have changed your mind on the case?



    Tumble, you have inquired as to "why" more posters have not responded with an "I don't know" answer. Fair question, I suppose.

    IMO - none of us here on this forum "know" for an absolute fact "who" was responsible for JonBenet's horrific murder - but, that doesn't mean we haven't formulated an opinion. Even one that may change from time to time ...

    What we have is circumstantial evidence for each of us to consider and formulate our own individual "opinions" on what we have learned over time.

    Some information and evidence is yet to be revealed as the investigation is still not complete.

    However, our current opinions are based on what we have learned - 'the facts' .. 'the evidence' - as well as our own "gut feelings" which must be factored in to the equation. Sadly, I've noticed that some folks pick & choose the facts & evidence they find worthy & acceptable to substantiate their chosen position.

    Hopefully, a "verdict" in this horrendous murder case will be decided in a court of law - based on all the evidence (fairly) presented - and thankfully, not on any of the many biased crime sleuthing forums.

    As for DNA - nothing would please me more than the slam-dunk of an intruder's DNA to be positively identified and attributed to a known suspect. I'm just afraid that won't happen and the 'cloud of suspicion' will continue for years to come.

    More than anything else - I want "true justice" for JonBenet. That's my bottom line .. as I'm confident it is for all posters on this JBR forum.


    13th Juror

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    579
    Thanks to everyone who voted answered so far.

    I read you comments with great interest.

    More than anything else - I want "true justice" for JonBenet.

    Couldn't agree more.

    The ideal suspect's handwriting will be a ringer.

    Sorry I don't understand 'ringer'.

    Some information and evidence is yet to be revealed as the investigation is still not complete.

    I find this really frustrating
    But I understand that it have to be done that way.
    Maybe we should start a thread guessing what these evidence could be.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    "Orlando area" - Central Fla
    Posts
    795
    Quote Originally Posted by tumble

    Or is the DNA it?
    If there was no foreign DNA would you have changed your mind on the case?
    No, I strongly believe there was an intruder.

    The Boulder Police blew this one a long time ago. I just hope this new DA and her vast support staff are able to right the wrongs of the past investigation. JonBenet and her family deserve the truth.


    Rum Tum Tugger
    "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated ... I hold that the more helpless a creature, the more entitled it is to protection by man from the cruelty of man."



    Rum Tum Tugger






  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,652
    Quote Originally Posted by Rum Tum Tugger
    No, I strongly believe there was an intruder.

    The Boulder Police blew this one a long time ago. I just hope this new DA and her vast support staff are able to right the wrongs of the past investigation. JonBenet and her family deserve the truth.
    Rum Tum Tugger
    Just because the investigation was botched doesn't mean that there was an intruder.
    Imo the Boulder police ruined the investigation right from the start because they failed to arrest the Ramseys as soon as JB's dead body was discovered in their own home.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    214

    dna

    I think the suspect we have is so obsessive the way he washed and redressed JBR that the dna might well not be there at all. We note there were no fingerprints on the flashlight in the kitchen - not even the family's, meaning he wiped it down as well as probably everything else.

    The speck of white male dna on the underwear is mixed with JBR's blood and that is what the investigators hope will match Karr's. If it doesn't, I still think he could be found guilty with enough other evidence. A convincing case has to be built from the ground up.

    In the reverse of this situation, the Simpson case had tons of dna, and he still went free because the defense argued so successfully that the dna was mishandled, and therefore not reliable.

    Anything could happen. I still think OJ did it and depending on the mountain of evidence they have on Karr, if it is convincing enough I don't think dna is required.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    4,530
    I didn't know about the foreign DNA until fairly recently - I've been leaning towards that it was probably an intruder, based partially on the police lies in this case - the behavior where they tried to convict in the media through releasing misleading statements and the occasional flat out lie - holding the body hostage (like the killers would be so emotionally attached to the body?) - and just the length of the investigation that found nothing to go to trial with, sufficiently nothing that they've moved on and now think it was an intruder - that's what sets my opinion.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    "Orlando area" - Central Fla
    Posts
    795

    Agree to disagree, so to speak

    Quote Originally Posted by rashomon

    Just because the investigation was botched doesn't mean that there was an intruder.

    Imo the Boulder police ruined the investigation right from the start because they failed to arrest the Ramseys as soon as JB's dead body was discovered in their own home.

    I didn't connect the 2 sentences with the word "because".

    #1. I believe the perpetrator that murdered JonBenet was an intruder, not either one of her parents.

    #2. I feel that the inept BPD totally blew this case back in Dec. of 1996 with their rush to judgement of the Ramsey parents.

    One thought is not contingent upon the other.

    We agree on the failures of the BPD, but not on the reasoning.

    Rum Tum Tugger

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Leicester, UK
    Posts
    234
    Quote Originally Posted by cwiz24
    To me the DNA means virtually nothing. The minuscule amount of DNA found in her underpants could have been left there by a sneezing, coughing, spittle-prone underwear factory worker. And if that is the case, that DNA cannot be used to exclude anyone from involvement. The DNA under her fingernails was compromised by the use of one clipper rather than 10. So my confidence in that DNA, even if they get a partial match, is shaky at best.

    If the DNA does not match, Karr cannot be excluded in my opinion because of the two reasons I listed above. Something else will have to exclude him, like hard proof that he was not in Colorado that night.

    My reasoning for believing in an intruder is the evidence around the window well, the shoeprint, and the 911 tape. One of my stongest feelings though revolves around the parents (or parent) being able to stage a kidnapping/murder scene effectively, come up with some weird and totally unnecessary ransom note situation, and write an intelligible ransom note after just killing their own child. I would think that the fear of being caught combined with the (presumably) unexpected murder and the grief associated with a dead child would have caused them to mess up. Leave some sign that obviously implicated themselves. But, if they did it, the Ramseys staged the perfect crime scene. In my opinion, that would have been impossible.
    I would remain an IDI, for the reasons cited above by cwiz.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the prowl
    Posts
    26,409
    Quote Originally Posted by rashomon
    Just because the investigation was botched doesn't mean that there was an intruder.
    Imo the Boulder police ruined the investigation right from the start because they failed to arrest the Ramseys as soon as JB's dead body was discovered in their own home.
    I think they botched it by not securing the home (Ramseys already had company over when LE got there) and allowing the Ramseys to control the situation rather than LE proceeding the way they would now if a child's murdered body were found in the home. This investigation was doomed from the beginning due to LE lack of experience and kid glove treatment of Ramseys. Hopefully they have the perpetrator in custody, but I'm not convinced yet.
    Rest in Peace
    Joey, Summer, Gianni & Joseph Mateo


Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. POLL--What do you think happened to Zach Marrs -POLL
    By CARIIS in forum The Poll Forum! Public Welcome To Participate
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-22-2016, 10:51 AM
  2. New Poll: The Chandelier poll
    By arielilane in forum Rebecca Zahau Nalepa
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 08-05-2013, 11:33 PM
  3. IDIs On This Forum?
    By Fenton in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 1179
    Last Post: 09-15-2007, 03:15 AM