Cyril Wecht's theory of the murder

New Posts

I know that Steve Thomas says it wasn't just that that the R's had $$/connections that led to them not being arrested, but also the passive attitude of Boulder County. But, if the R's had just been an ordinary middle class family, well I think the case would have at least made it past the GJ stage. I also couldn't see there being a plea bargain if an intruder had killed JonBenet but who knows. Boulder was nervous about taking any case to trial because they had no experience, and that was probably confounded by the fact that the R's would have a great defense team.
 
Knock off the personal attacks. Debate is fine but not this attacking of one another. :nono:
 
Guys, What Nurse said OK?

Come on if you are in here discussing the JBR case then you know the rules.

This is the one forum where the mods shouldn't have to worry about posters breaking the rules.

Thank You.
 
Sorry Tricia and Nurse!

It is tough because even though none of us know JonBenet we are all personally invested in her unsolved crime. We want justice for Jon Benet.

For me that means following the path that I see cut out in the evidence.

For me the presence of unknown DNA means someone else was there. The police use DNA to clear people all the time, AS was done with The guy they brought back from Asia to investigate. Carr. They investigated the DNA his did not match and he was cleared.

However this does not seem to apply to the Ramseys. There is DNA that has not been identified. That to me changes the odds of it being the Ramseys drastically.

Find the person that donated that DNA and I believe you find the killer.
 
ScarlettScarpetta said:
Sorry Tricia and Nurse!

It is tough because even though none of us know JonBenet we are all personally invested in her unsolved crime. We want justice for Jon Benet.

For me that means following the path that I see cut out in the evidence.

For me the presence of unknown DNA means someone else was there. The police use DNA to clear people all the time, AS was done with The guy they brought back from Asia to investigate. Carr. They investigated the DNA his did not match and he was cleared.

However this does not seem to apply to the Ramseys. There is DNA that has not been identified. That to me changes the odds of it being the Ramseys drastically.

Find the person that donated that DNA and I believe you find the killer.
Click to expand...

As many on this site have discussed, there are problems with the DNA in this case. I won't get into all of the problems but will highlight the one that troubles me the most.
The DNA was a mix, JB and a male. However the sample wasn't from blood or semen. So what was it? And why is it nowhere but the panties when the length of the intimacy suggests there should be more samples and, most likely, in other places on her body?
 
2 percent said:
As many on this site have discussed, there are problems with the DNA in this case. I won't get into all of the problems but will highlight the one that troubles me the most.
The DNA was a mix, JB and a male. However the sample wasn't from blood or semen. So what was it? And why is it nowhere but the panties when the length of the intimacy suggests there should be more samples and, most likely, in other places on her body?
Click to expand...

2 percent,
Inferrence by deduction leads you to skin cells of some type. They were allegedly found on the front and banding of the longjohns also?

These cells could have arrived via JonBenet herself after she touched a door handle, a toilet flushing button, a car seat, etc.

There were other unidentified unique touch-dna samples found on JonBenet. Naturally in the R's self-interest they promoted knowledge of the cells on the longjohns.

.
 
2 percent said:
As many on this site have discussed, there are problems with the DNA in this case. I won't get into all of the problems but will highlight the one that troubles me the most.
The DNA was a mix, JB and a male. However the sample wasn't from blood or semen. So what was it? And why is it nowhere but the panties when the length of the intimacy suggests there should be more samples and, most likely, in other places on her body?
Click to expand...

That is a great question.. I am not a DNA expert so that will take time for me to figure out. I have been researching all day and looking for some answers.

Right now the issue for me is that there still is unknown DNA.

I am sure it must be frustrating to feel you have this all figured out and then a "new to the case in this forum" gal comes along and feels differently.

For me every one starts out innocent. I don't every assume people are guilty until I see it in black and white.
Everyone gets the benefit of the doubt with me, until well, They don't.

I plan to do some more research and see where that leads me.
 
ScarlettScarpetta said:
I am sure it must be frustrating to feel you have this all figured out and then a "new to the case in this forum" gal comes along and feels differently.

For me every one starts out innocent. I don't every assume people are guilty until I see it in black and white.
Everyone gets the benefit of the doubt with me, until well, They don't.

I plan to do some more research and see where that leads me.
Click to expand...

Indeed
:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:
 
ScarlettScarpetta said:
That is a great question.. I am not a DNA expert so that will take time for me to figure out. I have been researching all day and looking for some answers.

Right now the issue for me is that there still is unknown DNA.

I am sure it must be frustrating to feel you have this all figured out and then a "new to the case in this forum" gal comes along and feels differently.

For me every one starts out innocent. I don't every assume people are guilty until I see it in black and white.
Everyone gets the benefit of the doubt with me, until well, They don't.

I plan to do some more research and see where that leads me.
Click to expand...

There have been several others who share your views. However, when you do your research on Touch DNA, you will see how if differers from other DNA. Had this unknown DNA been semen or blood, I might share your views as well as many others here Because then, there is more of a direct link to the killer. If the DNA was semen or blood, THEN I would agree "find the door of the DNA and you find the killer". BUT this DNA was skin cells- and we all have other people's skin cells on our hands most of the time. Touch a doorknob, touch a toilet handle, pick up a used coffee cup, newspaper, etc and you have picked up someone else's touch DNA. This is why the DNA on JB's clothing cannot be used to point to the killer. It also appears NO WHERE ELSE on the crime scene- which is suspect right there. NO way a killer can leave DNA on 2 items of clothing and no where else in the crime scene. The family attended a party that day. LOADS of skin cells- just shake someone's hand and you have their DNA. BOTH parents admit to touching JB's clothing. Patsy admitted to pulling the longjohns on her when the got home and JR was SEEN to be holding her stiffened body by the waistbands of the longjohns/panties. If JR shook someone' s hand at that party, held a glass or plate that was held by someone else first, touched a doorknob, etc. those skin cells could have been transferred to JB's clothing that way. So, simply because it IS skin cells it cannot be said to belong to the killer.
I must add that as far as the R's guilt or involvement, the touch DNA is completely neutral. It neither implicates them nor exonerates them. It may be artifact and not have anything to do with her death at all.
 
I'm not sure that is my conclusion from your information.

I can think that if someone was wearing gloves for some of the time that would explain no touch DNA that matched anywhere else.

I don't think that people choose IDI as their POV. I think they have that POV because they have not seen proof beyond doubt that it was Rdi.
 
ScarlettScarpetta: Have you read the BlueCrab thread entitled "Why the GJ Likely Solved the Case in 1999? Lots of valuable info and evidence described there.

Link below:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20436"]Why GJ Likely Solved Case In 1999 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]
 
ScarlettScarpetta said:
I did read the comments but find it all to be speculation. I don't believe that BR was involved in this death at all.

I'm still working on reading evidence but to convince me a 9 yr old did this, it will take a lot.
Click to expand...

I'm with you, there is essentially nothing anyone can say that will convince me Burke is either the murderer or the abuser.

It just makes no sense to me at all.

We already have two lying staging abusing psychos in the house, adult ones.

I don't understand why everyone feels the need to blame a 9 year old who is probably a victim also. :(
 
I hear that. I really have been reading a lot of good info trying to steer clear for just speculation but follow the facts.
I can see why people think the Ramsey's did it. I can see how they get there but not BR.
 
ScarlettScarpetta said:
I hear that. I really have been reading a lot of good info trying to steer clear for just speculation but follow the facts.
I can see why people think the Ramsey's did it. I can see how they get there but not BR.
Click to expand...

Yep. It just makes no sense whatsoever.

I think people don't want to acknowledge that two wealthy, white parents could do this to their daughter then lie about it.

I can understand the resistance. It is almost unbelievable...however all the evidence, including the shenanigans afterwards, points to only two people.

John and Patsy.

:moo:
 
Well I'm not there yet either. ;) but I'm still learning and reading.
 
We often form opinions by what we "feel", "believe" and what makes "sense" .

Not too long ago, a friend of mine committed suicide. He blasted his face off with a shotgun. It made "no sense". I couldn't "believe" he did it. I "felt" someone must have killed him. Fact is: He did it to himself.

It can be difficult to base theories on facts, evidence and logic because opinions based on our feelings and beliefs.......well they just make us "feel" better.
IMO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 159 more.
Total: 4,503 (members: 160, guests: 4,343)

Online statistics

Members online
160
Guests online
4,344
Total visitors
4,504
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,529
Messages
17,970,430
Members
228,795
Latest member
EnvyofAngels
Back
Top