No governmental support for RDI.

Holdontoyourhat · Sep 14, 2009

The following are three examples of governmental support for IDI. These have not been overturned by any other governmental office or agency.

U.S. District Judge Julie E. Carnes, a former federal prosecutor, ruled that there is "abundant evidence" to support assertions by JonBenét's parents, John B. and Patricia P. "Patsy" Ramsey, "that an intruder entered their home at some point during the night of Dec. 25, 1996, and killed their daughter."

Richard Dusick (sic) of the U.S. Secret Service concluded that there was "no evidence to indicate that Patsy Ramsey executed any of the questioned material appearing on the Ransom Note." (SMF P 200; PSMF P 200.)" (Carnes 2003:26, note 14).

On July 9, 2008, the Boulder District Attorney's office announced that as a result of newly developed DNA sampling and testing techniques, the Ramsey family members are no longer considered suspects in the case.[14][15] In light of the new DNA evidence, Boulder County District Attorney Mary Lacy gave a letter[16] to John Ramsey the same day, officially apologizing to the Ramsey family:

"This new scientific evidence convinces us...to state that we do not consider your immediate family, including you, your wife, Patsy, and your son, Burke, to be under any suspicion in the commission of this crime. ..

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There seems to be no governmental support for the RDI point of view, in any comparable form.

Ravyn · Sep 14, 2009

Richard Dusick (sic) of the U.S. Secret Service concluded that there was "no evidence to indicate that Patsy Ramsey executed any of the questioned material appearing on the Ransom Note." (SMF P 200; PSMF P 200.)" (Carnes 2003:26, note 14).

What questions was he asked this don't say PR didn't write the RN but no evidence to indicate any questioned material so if he was asked just certain questions and please U.S. Secret Service and the R's law firm prepare Bill Clinton's taxes....

BBB167893 · Sep 14, 2009

Ravyn said:
Richard Dusick (sic) of the U.S. Secret Service concluded that there was "no evidence to indicate that Patsy Ramsey executed any of the questioned material appearing on the Ransom Note." (SMF P 200; PSMF P 200.)" (Carnes 2003:26, note 14).

What questions was he asked this don't say PR didn't write the RN but no evidence to indicate any questioned material so if he was asked just certain questions and please U.S. Secret Service and the R's law firm prepare Bill Clinton's taxes....

It's more than that, Ravyn. Aside from the question as to how much work he actually does, there are serious questions as to how he arrived at his conclusion. Chet Ubowski was quite upset with it, if memory serves.

Holdontoyourhat said:
There seems to be no governmental support for the RDI point of view, in any comparable form.

I believe Ronald Reagan sums up my feelings: "Government is not the solution to the problem. Government IS the problem."

Ravyn · Sep 14, 2009

U.S. District Judge Julie E. Carnes, a former federal prosecutor, ruled that there is "abundant evidence" to support assertions by JonBenét's parents, John B. and Patricia P. "Patsy" Ramsey, "that an intruder entered their home at some point during the night of Dec. 25, 1996, and killed their daughter

And alot of stuff that she ruled in favor of the Ramsey's like hi tech shoes and palm prints on the winecellar door done been indentified as Ramsey... But for some unknown reason this judge said that the high tech shoes or the palm prints wasn't indentified..So there I ask for a judge that seen everything that supports IDI..Cause you can't sell this judge to me...

Ravyn · Sep 14, 2009

On July 9, 2008, the Boulder District Attorney's office announced that as a result of newly developed DNA sampling and testing techniques, the Ramsey family members are no longer considered suspects in the case.[14][15] In light of the new DNA evidence, Boulder County District Attorney Mary Lacy gave a letter[16] to John Ramsey the same day, officially apologizing to the Ramsey family

And I think July 2003 LW said on LKL that DA Lacy talked to him and that she was going to send the DNA to the FBI..OK, she sent it Dec 2003...But it took 5 years to come back and say the Ramsey family is cleared wow didn't know it takes five years...

Holdontoyourhat · Sep 15, 2009

Ravyn said:
What questions was he asked this don't say PR didn't write the RN but no evidence to indicate any questioned material so if he was asked just certain questions and please U.S. Secret Service and the R's law firm prepare Bill Clinton's taxes....

Then how come its so hard to get one single govt office to side with you?
I've got three.:crazy:

Holdontoyourhat · Sep 15, 2009

SuperDave said:
I believe Ronald Reagan sums up my feelings: "Government is not the solution to the problem. Government IS the problem."

You're absolutely right. As far as RDI is concerned, government IS the problem. It stands firmly in your way, and for good reasons.

Ravyn · Sep 15, 2009

Holdontoyourhat said:
Then how come its so hard to get one single govt office to side with you?
I've got three.:crazy:

Wow,yeah IDI really have something to brag about there....And you really have no clue where this case is heading now so why don't we sit back and see.

OH wait everytime we did have a witness for the RDI we have your people threating them or trying destory them..

And it took five years for the DA to clear the R's why really ask yourself why..

Ravyn · Sep 15, 2009

Holdontoyourhat said:
You're absolutely right. As far as RDI is concerned, government IS the problem. It stands firmly in your way, and for good reasons.

In your eyes it stands in our way...But until you show me a US Federal Judge with all the evidence that says it was an intruder you are wasting your breath here...

madeleine · Sep 15, 2009

Ravyn said:
Wow,yeah IDI really have something to brag about there....And you really have no clue where this case is heading now so why don't we sit back and see.

OH wait everytime we did have a witness for the RDI we have your people threating them or trying destory them..
And it took five years for the DA to clear the R's why really ask yourself why..

Or they try to minimize their work& reputation.Why, if our experts are not valuable,why bother then?Hm?

madeleine · Sep 15, 2009

It's like Lin Wood did re the red fibers.
Why come up with an innocent explanation for them if they don't exist in the first place?

Why bother?This only confirmed to me that those fibers ARE real and they DO belong to PR.

Ravyn · Sep 15, 2009

madeleine said:
It's like Lin Wood did re the red fibers.
Why come up with an innocent explanation for them if they don't exist in the first place?Why bother?This only confirmed to me that those fibers ARE real and they DO belong to PR.

The R's in their book messed that up cause PR said when she lay over JonBenet in the livingroom and

the blanket was already covering her and this is JR words..

Ravyn · Sep 15, 2009

And beyond me why Judge Julie Carnes would tell Wolfe he will remain a suspect in this case...And he was cleared from all involement in this case before the lawsuit...So if this don't goes JR's way in this new investigation oh but I have a suspect Judge Julie says so...

Holdontoyourhat · Sep 15, 2009

Ravyn said:
Wow,yeah IDI really have something to brag about there....And you really have no clue where this case is heading now so why don't we sit back and see.

OH wait everytime we did have a witness for the RDI we have your people threating them or trying destory them..

And it took five years for the DA to clear the R's why really ask yourself why..

Correct. IDI has something to brag about there. Whereas RDI does not.

The only affidavit RDI has is one government official who made a statement that was rather vague and unprofessional.

Ravyn · Sep 15, 2009

Holdontoyourhat said:
Correct. IDI has something to brag about there. Whereas RDI does not.

The only affidavit RDI has is one government official who made a statement that was rather vague and unprofessional.

Really how do figure that you have anything when one judge could bring what Judge Carnes says down cause why they look at all the evidence and it just shows like you always argue that the R's lawyers have pull..Not for truth but to cover what happen to JonBenet

BBB167893 · Sep 15, 2009

Holdontoyourhat said:
You're absolutely right. As far as RDI is concerned, government IS the problem. It stands firmly in your way, and for good reasons.

Don't be a wise guy, HOTYH. You know darn well what I mean. Maybe you haven't noticed, but this government has a HABIT of screwing up. Just last week we marked 8 years since 9/11, the biggest govt screwup in recent memory. There's NOTHING the government can do that private entities can't do better. Far as I go, that applies not just to this case, but in general.

BBB167893 · Sep 15, 2009

Ravyn said:
OH wait everytime we did have a witness for the RDI we have your people threating them or trying destory them.

Yeah, ABOUT that...

BBB167893 · Sep 15, 2009

madeleine said:
Or they try to minimize their work& reputation.Why, if our experts are not valuable,why bother then?Hm?

Damn good question.

madeleine · Sep 15, 2009

SuperDave said:
Damn good question.

If our experts are just "some dudes" why bother discredit them?Ain't that funny.
Still,no one stood up for Lacy ,why are IDI's never defending her?

BBB167893 · Sep 15, 2009

Holdontoyourhat said:
The only affidavit RDI has is one government official who made a statement that was rather vague and unprofessional.

Who was that again and what was "vague and unprofessional" about it?

No governmental support for RDI.

Former Member

New Member

Former Member

New Member

New Member

Former Member

Former Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Former Member

New Member

Former Member

Former Member

Former Member

Well-Known Member

Former Member

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics