985 users online (136 members and 849 guests)  


The Killing Season - Websleuths

Websleuths News


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 26
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,019

    Rare opinion piece on JBR from Denver Post

    I don't think this has been posted yet. If it has, apologies.


    http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_13059452



    "A pile of evidence still points to the possibility a family member killed JonBenet."

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,948
    Of course it does,Lacy's dna doesn't make the fiber evidence,the rn and so other many things just go away.
    Ramsey case: "Instead of being the DNA of one person, they have instead created a composite of someone who does not exist. "

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,948
    If an outsider is ever charged — remember Lacey's John Mark Karr debacle of three years ago? — it wouldn't be hard to sow the seeds of reasonable doubt in at least one juror's mind. A pile of evidence still points to the possibility a family member killed JonBenet.
    Not only did Lacy's decision clear the prime suspects,but she made it harder for an intruder to be prosecuted if that will ever be the case (IMO it won't).
    Ramsey case: "Instead of being the DNA of one person, they have instead created a composite of someone who does not exist. "

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    685
    Thanks for posting that. There's no similarities in the two cases except the ages of the daughters. I remember reading about that case a while back. There were SEVEN children living in depicable conditions....there is a family history and socioeconomic conditions that factor into the killing of this child.

    If there is ever a DNA match, the perp will be convicted. It all hinges on the DNA in the JBR case. As far as clearing or not clearing...that is way overblown. Someone can be cleared one day---a suspect the next. Lacy wanted to set the record straight as far as where things stood with all the evidence, and I applaud her for doing that.

    The reporter is not correct regarding the handwriting analysis---we know Patsy scored very low on the l-5 scale--I believe 4.5--with 5 being she did not write the note. I wish these guys would get their facts right.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,150
    There is a comment below the piece that is interesting, IMO. Both of the cases are heartbreaking.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,019
    Quote Originally Posted by Maikai View Post
    Thanks for posting that. There's no similarities in the two cases except the ages of the daughters. I remember reading about that case a while back. There were SEVEN children living in depicable conditions....there is a family history and socioeconomic conditions that factor into the killing of this child.

    If there is ever a DNA match, the perp will be convicted. It all hinges on the DNA in the JBR case. As far as clearing or not clearing...that is way overblown. Someone can be cleared one day---a suspect the next. Lacy wanted to set the record straight as far as where things stood with all the evidence, and I applaud her for doing that.

    The reporter is not correct regarding the handwriting analysis---we know Patsy scored very low on the l-5 scale--I believe 4.5--with 5 being she did not write the note. I wish these guys would get their facts right.

    In fairness, though, Maikai, wasn't that 1-5 scale a sort of made-up appellation by the 'defence.' Even if it wasn't, there are plenty that don't eliminate her using more standard methodology.

    WRT Lacy, the problem is that she has identified the DNA as being critical and has essentially handed anyone whose DNA doesn't match (no matter how well they fit otherwise) their reasonable doubt. I can almost write the defence lawyer's speech now...

    Her motives may have been as pure as the driven snow but she made a cataclysmic mistake that could ruin the chances of this case ever being successfully tried. I don 't know here her head was...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,297
    Quote Originally Posted by Sophie View Post
    In fairness, though, Maikai, wasn't that 1-5 scale a sort of made-up appellation by the 'defence.' Even if it wasn't, there are plenty that don't eliminate her using more standard methodology.

    WRT Lacy, the problem is that she has identified the DNA as being critical and has essentially handed anyone whose DNA doesn't match (no matter how well they fit otherwise) their reasonable doubt. I can almost write the defence lawyer's speech now...

    Her motives may have been as pure as the driven snow but she made a cataclysmic mistake that could ruin the chances of this case ever being successfully tried. I don 't know here her head was...

    Sophie,

    I understand your concerns. The reality of this case, much of the way it has been bungled by all parties involved, is DNA. It doesn't matter if we like it or not. I personally believe the DNA to be the biggest clue in the case and I understand that you do not. If for whatever reason all of this DNA was an innocent transference, this case will never be solved. We can point fingers all day but enough blame on all parties can be shared whether IDI, RDI, or whatever.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    12,914
    Quote Originally Posted by Maikai View Post
    As far as clearing or not clearing...that is way overblown. Someone can be cleared one day---a suspect the next.


    Lacy wanted to set the record straight as far as where things stood with all the evidence, and I applaud her for doing that.
    I think you need to rephrase that: it should say "as far as she stood," period.

    The reporter is not correct regarding the handwriting analysis--we know Patsy scored very low on the l-5 scale--I believe 4.5--with 5 being she did not write the note.
    Wrong. No such scale exists. US v. Thornton established a 9-point scale.

    I wish these guys would get their facts right.
    So do I. That's why it's nice to see one that does!
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    12,914
    Quote Originally Posted by Sophie View Post
    In fairness, though, Maikai, wasn't that 1-5 scale a sort of made-up appellation by the 'defence.'
    You got it, love. Just whipped it out of thin air, they did.

    WRT Lacy, the problem is that she has identified the DNA as being critical and has essentially handed anyone whose DNA doesn't match (no matter how well they fit otherwise) their reasonable doubt. I can almost write the defence lawyer's speech now...
    That was the point the writer was trying to get across.

    Her motives may have been as pure as the driven snow but she made a cataclysmic mistake that could ruin the chances of this case ever being successfully tried. I don 't know here her head was...
    I could name a place...(LOL)
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    1,040
    Sometimes I wonder if everyone ever stop to think if PR wrote this RN and other than killing JB what could get her to write the RN that could had been led back to her I know crazy thought here but I just ask my self this sometimes....
    Knowledge of time is precious.Wisdom of truth is more precious than time..Opinions I write are mine..


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,172

    Talking

    PR wrote the letter and she was the one threatening JR.. imo

    if i remember correctly, the darn bogus letter never even mentions PR, its always about JR doe this, JR do that

    and if that is the case, i find that really strange because a foreign faction
    would certainly threaten both parent

    ahhhh but *human nature* strikes again
    ( the writer doesnt mention themselves because they are the one writing the letter ) OHHHHHHHHHHH OHHHHHHHHHH


    if PR knew JR was molesting JBR and yet JR knows that PR killed the child

    who is a worse parent ?

    a killer

    a molester ?


    both are bad, very vey very bad


  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    1,040
    But then again by threating JR this could open the doors to alot of different people that could be blamed....Mainly AG employees....And who among the two R's took more steps to cover their tracks in this crime...And he stated that in 2001 the lawyers hired investigators to make a defense for him if charges was ever brought against him...Now if I remember correctly PR died in 2006....
    Knowledge of time is precious.Wisdom of truth is more precious than time..Opinions I write are mine..

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    685
    Quote Originally Posted by robotdog View Post
    PR wrote the letter and she was the one threatening JR.. imo

    if i remember correctly, the darn bogus letter never even mentions PR, its always about JR doe this, JR do that

    and if that is the case, i find that really strange because a foreign faction
    would certainly threaten both parent

    ahhhh but *human nature* strikes again
    ( the writer doesnt mention themselves because they are the one writing the letter ) OHHHHHHHHHHH OHHHHHHHHHH


    if PR knew JR was molesting JBR and yet JR knows that PR killed the child

    who is a worse parent ?

    a killer

    a molester ?


    both are bad, very vey very bad

    On the other hand, JonBenet is not mentioned by name in the ransom note, either. Patsy was not mentioned in the Access article that appeared 4 days earlier. It's possible the writer did not know Patsy's name...just like JonBenet. AND if that is the case, it's not someone close to the Ramseys.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,172

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by Maikai View Post
    On the other hand, JonBenet is not mentioned by name in the ransom note, either. Patsy was not mentioned in the Access article that appeared 4 days earlier. It's possible the writer did not know Patsy's name...just like JonBenet. AND if that is the case, it's not someone close to the Ramseys.
    "they" knew about the dollar amount of his bonus
    "they" knew his phone number
    "they" knew he was from the south

    they were trampsing around the house for hours undetected... having access to everything....notebooks, wallets, mail, files, etc etc etc

    easily could have found names of people if they wanted

    nawwwwwwwww..... the reason no names other than john's were written is because the writer of the NOTE (PR) could not separate herself
    know what i mean ???

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,172
    wonder if PR commonly used "percentages" when discussing every day situations. the Ransom note uses at least 2 references of percentages

    99 percent and 100 percent


    interesting, very interesting

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. That One Key Piece of Guilty Evidence
    By PaperDoll in forum Cooper Harris
    Replies: 191
    Last Post: 04-22-2016, 03:56 AM
  2. Most significant piece of evidence.
    By Rebdot in forum Darlie Routier
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 02-04-2011, 06:08 PM
  3. Opinion Piece: Casey Out in 3 Years!
    By gamom in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 117
    Last Post: 04-22-2010, 09:12 AM