Where are the experts?

Nedthan Johns · #1 07-10-2008, 04:19 PM

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 · #2 07-10-2008, 04:23 PM

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 · #3 07-10-2008, 04:25 PM

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

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

Nedthan Johns · #4 07-10-2008, 04:31 PM

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

Other videos follow

Nedthan Johns · #5 07-10-2008, 04:39 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/10/...ml#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 · #6 07-10-2008, 04:43 PM

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 · #7 07-10-2008, 05:19 PM

http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/r..._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 · #8 07-10-2008, 05:27 PM

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/...n4247767.shtml
The Early Show

Nedthan Johns · #9 07-10-2008, 06:08 PM

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 · #10 07-10-2008, 06:11 PM

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 · #11 07-10-2008, 06:25 PM

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

Nedthan Johns · #12 07-10-2008, 06:48 PM

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

Nedthan Johns · #13 07-10-2008, 06:53 PM

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 · #14 07-10-2008, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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

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 · #15 07-10-2008, 07:00 PM

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

Boulder DA's office

LinasK · #16 07-10-2008, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nedthan Johns

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/10/...ml#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 · #17 07-10-2008, 07:31 PM

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 · #18 07-10-2008, 08:01 PM

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 · #19 07-10-2008, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

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 · #20 07-10-2008, 08:34 PM

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

RiverRat · #21 07-10-2008, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrsMush99

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 · #22 07-10-2008, 09:10 PM

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

RiverRat · #23 07-10-2008, 09:38 PM

Dan Abrams MSNBC Transcript - July 9, 2008

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...ead.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 · #24 07-10-2008, 11:55 PM

Quote:

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.

Quote:

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

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

trixie · #25 07-11-2008, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RiverRat

Dan Abrams MSNBC Transcript - July 9, 2008

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...ead.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.