Paula Woodward’s new book.

[David Rogers]

Did she correct the mistakes in the first book?

 

[fr brown]

I have a used copy of this book. It has photocopies of police reports by French and Arndt that I've found useful.

Off hand, the one error that comes to mind is that the Hi-TEC bootprint is mirror-imaged.

There are many "sins of omission" and some malicious interpretations. It's not even-handed by any stretch of the imagination

 

[chutoi]

What was the first book mistakes ? I haven't read it

 

[fr brown]

I watched part of Woodward being interviewed. She repeated the old Ramsey canard about all the handwriting experts virtually eliminating Patsy as being author of the note. As I recall, she said that the experts put Patsy within "one percentage point" of being eliminated. What is the woman talking about? I don't think she knows what a percentage point is. A Ramsey expert said that Patsy was a 4.5 out of 5 where 5 is elimination. That's 90%, 10 percentage points to elimination. To be within one percentage point, the expert would have to have given Patsy a 4.95 out of 5. That would be 99%.

The larger point is, of course, that it was only the Ramsey experts that put Patsy that close to elimination. Chet Ubowski of the CBI, for instance, thought that Patsy wrote the note and Speckin thought that some of the letters resembled Patsy's handwriting. Lou Smit said that the "general consensus" of the handwriting experts was "inconclusive or below." Inconclusive is smack in the middle of any handwriting scale.

The handwriting evidence isn't even strong, yet the Ramsey side has felt the need to lie about it for 25 years. That alone tells me that Patsy wrote the note.

 

[UKGuy]

I watched part of Woodward being interviewed. She repeated the old Ramsey canard about all the handwriting experts virtually eliminating Patsy as being author of the note. As I recall, she said that the experts put Patsy within "one percentage point" of being eliminated. What is the woman talking about? I don't think she knows what a percentage point is. A Ramsey expert said that Patsy was a 4.5 out of 5 where 5 is elimination. That's 90%, 10 percentage points to elimination. To be within one percentage point, the expert would have to have given Patsy a 4.95 out of 5. That would be 99%.

The larger point is, of course, that it was only the Ramsey experts that put Patsy that close to elimination. Chet Ubowski of the CBI, for instance, thought that Patsy wrote the note and Speckin thought that some of the letters resembled Patsy's handwriting. Lou Smit said that the "general consensus" of the handwriting experts was "inconclusive or below." Inconclusive is smack in the middle of any handwriting scale.

The handwriting evidence isn't even strong, yet the Ramsey side has felt the need to lie about it for 25 years. That alone tells me that Patsy wrote the note.

fr brown,
ITA with you. Patsy authored that note. Not an educated Intruder equipped with french terms such as attache case, etc. I suspect JR would have written a three line demand?

Another way to approach this aspect is to rule out suspects by grammatical expertise, e.g. BR, far too young.

A similar exercise for JR should reveal a grammatical deficit.

PR's forensic markers are all over the wine-cellar crime-scene, why would that be if she is intending to stage herself out of a homicide case?

.

 

[OldBackstop]

I saw her interviewed for the first book and she said she had seen the report from the state psychosis who interviewed Burke in the video, and she had stated that in her opinion Burke didn't know who killed his sister.

 

[UKGuy]

I saw her interviewed for the first book and she said she had seen the report from the state psychosis who interviewed Burke in the video, and she had stated that in her opinion Burke didn't know who killed his sister.

OldBackstop,

Burke didn't know who killed his sister.

Well who is ever going to put their hands up and say: It Was Me?

That said BR might be telling the truth from his POV, as he never killed JonBenet, he just woke up to find her gone?

i.e. Patsy likely ligature asphyxiated JonBenet.

.

 

[OldBackstop]

Ok, so, eliminating Burke, PDI alone? Cuz, you know, that is what doting Christian mothers do on Xmas?

 

[fr brown]

Ok, so, eliminating Burke, PDI alone? Cuz, you know, that is what doting Christian mothers do on Xmas?

Seems like.

"Even Barbara Fernie, according to friends, began to have doubts. For months, she and Patsy had been inseparable—shopping, lunching, chatting on the phone. By early spring, Fernie began telling people, 'I am the one doing the grieving. Something is wrong with Patsy.' Soon, friends say, Barbara was dropped from the Ramsey inner circle...."

JonBenet Ramsey: Missing Innocence

 

[UKGuy]

Ok, so, eliminating Burke, PDI alone? Cuz, you know, that is what doting Christian mothers do on Xmas?

OldBackstop,
Yes, could be PDI alone, who knows, does anyone have a clue, as there is no smoking gun.

JR definitely assists PR with postmortem staging as does BR. The GJ recognized this and hit JR and PR with Assisting an Offender Counts in the True Bill list, i.e.

COUNT VII (Accessory to a Crime)

On or about December 25, and December 26, 1996 in Boulder County, Colorado, John Bennett Ramsey (or alternately, Patricia Paugh Ramsey) did unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree and Child Abuse Resulting in Death.

Were the GJ aware BR was awake faking being asleep that morning?

How Patsy never got charged with First Degree Homicide is beyond me, there is enough forensic evidence to move beyond probability and doubt.

I reckon Hunter did not want a trial, plain and simple, not filing the True Bills confirms this, its not as if it was an administrative oversight.

.

 

[fr brown]

In '98 Patsy was asked about two photos: one of her taken at the Whites' on Christmas night and a photo of the jacket her investigator eventually submitted to the police. What follows is my translation:

Patsy: "The reason I'm staring so hard at this photo of me at the Whites' is that I'm thinking that Priscilla must have made me put her jacket on for some reason I can't remember. I think I was actually wearing my Christmas sweater with the bobbles. You'd love it. It's adorable."

TDM: "WTF? You were wearing her jacket and not yours?"

Patsy: "I might have been in her living room and I might have been cold and she might have said 'put this on.' She had a similar jacket is my point."

TDM: "Did you get the jackets at the same time and place?"

Patsy: "No. I don't know. I don't remember. I don't know where she got hers. Please stop talking about my jacket."

TDM: "The jacket in the photo of you at the Whites' appears to be the same jacket as the jacket you sent us, so is that your jacket you're wearing at the Whites' or hers?"

Patsy: (Uh-oh, he thinks I'm saying I murdered JonBenet in Priscilla's jacket. I wanted him to think that Priscilla snuck over here and murdered JonBenet after making me put her jacket on for a while.)

"No, no, I'm just saying that Priscilla's is microscopically similar to mine, if you get my drift."

TDM: "Uh, OK."

Patsy: "I'm trying to figure out why I'd be wearing her jacket....Did you hear the one where a rabbi, a priest and a minister walk into a bar? One of them is wearing a Christmas sweater covered with stuff that wasn't found at the crime scene...."

TDM: "Huh?"

Patsy: "For a while after I saw this photo I thought I was wearing my own jacket at Priscilla's house, but I realize that's damaging so I'm fashioning a story to implicate her. Now I need to confuse you some more so show me the photo again and I'm going to mention the Christmas sweater with the bobbles one more time."

TDM: "Jeez, lady....is the jacket you sent us hers or yours?"

Patsy: "Mine."

TDM: "Just to make sure you can't back out of it later, is the jacket you sent us hers or yours?"

Patsy: "Mine."

 

[UKGuy]

In '98 Patsy was asked about two photos: one of her taken at the Whites' on Christmas night and a photo of the jacket her investigator eventually submitted to the police. What follows is my translation:

Patsy: "The reason I'm staring so hard at this photo of me at the Whites' is that I'm thinking that Priscilla must have made me put her jacket on for some reason I can't remember. I think I was actually wearing my Christmas sweater with the bobbles. You'd love it. It's adorable."

TDM: "WTF? You were wearing her jacket and not yours?"

Patsy: "I might have been in her living room and I might have been cold and she might have said 'put this on.' She had a similar jacket is my point."

TDM: "Did you get the jackets at the same time and place?"

Patsy: "No. I don't know. I don't remember. I don't know where she got hers. Please stop talking about my jacket."

TDM: "The jacket in the photo of you at the Whites' appears to be the same jacket as the jacket you sent us, so is that your jacket you're wearing at the Whites' or hers?"

Patsy: (Uh-oh, he thinks I'm saying I murdered JonBenet in Priscilla's jacket. I wanted him to think that Priscilla snuck over here and murdered JonBenet after making me put her jacket on for a while.)

"No, no, I'm just saying that Priscilla's is microscopically similar to mine, if you get my drift."

TDM: "Uh, OK."

Patsy: "I'm trying to figure out why I'd be wearing her jacket....Did you hear the one where a rabbi, a priest and a minister walk into a bar? One of them is wearing a Christmas sweater covered with stuff that wasn't found at the crime scene...."

TDM: "Huh?"

Patsy: "For a while after I saw this photo I thought I was wearing my own jacket at Priscilla's house, but I realize that's damaging so I'm fashioning a story to implicate her. Now I need to confuse you some more so show me the photo again and I'm going to mention the Christmas sweater with the bobbles one more time."

TDM: "Jeez, lady....is the jacket you sent us hers or yours?"

Patsy: "Mine."

TDM: "Just to make sure you can't back out of it later, is the jacket you sent us hers or yours?"

Patsy: "Mine."

fr brown,
Has to be Patsy's attempt at smoke and mirrors. She had to know her forensic markers were left all over the wine-cellar crime-scene as well as beyond, e.g. paint-tote.

Patsy wants everyone to believe it all arrived accidentally!

.

 

[UKGuy]

Here is a quick overview of Paula Woodward's new book, the main difficulty is determining fact from fiction as the author does not offer citations.

Unsolved: The JonBenét Ramsey Murder 25 Years Later. Introduction, Excerpt

For this book, I interviewed a homicide detective about the planned leaks and the evidence. The detective has thirty years of homicide experience in a major metropolitan city. He has worked on hundreds of homicides and is familiar with the Ramsey case. He has never worked in Boulder and has the credibility of an outsider for this particular case. He won’t allow his name to be used because of the negative impacts of this case. He comments about what is valuable and what isn’t with the evidence available, and he has observations about the media disinformation plan as it unfolds.

The police on the Ramsey case spent untold dollars and acted without supervision in their zeal to convict the Ramseys. I believe it’s imperative to expose public servants whose job is to help, but who instead harm. Those are the types of stories I have reported as an investigative reporter for more than thirty years.

Unsolved includes documents and research from the twenty-five years I’ve spent on the case. I began reporting on it the day after JonBenét’s body was found. I was an investigative reporter for television station KUSA TV in Denver. I also wrote and reported during that time for The Denver Post and the Rocky Mountain News as part of a business partnership.

Documents utilized for evaluating the evidence in the case and the strategic and deliberate mistruths and leaks by the Boulder Police Department and Boulder District Attorney’s Office include a re-examination of newspaper archives from Newspapers.com, The Denver Post, the Rocky Mountain News, and the Boulder Daily Camera. National television evening news broadcasts for ABC, NBC, CBS, and CNN were examined using the Vanderbilt University Television News Archives in Nashville, Tennessee.

Paula Woodward reckons the case is IDI, so takes every opportunity to rubbish any RDI claims.

Here is an example:
Unsolved: The JonBenét Ramsey Murder 25 Years Later. Chapter 11: Evidence — District Attorney Exoneration, Excerpt

As part of the continuing investigation into who killed JonBenét Ramsey, Lacy’s office looked at the child’s clothing—specifically her long johns—that had not been tested for DNA. With the experience of her sexual assault background guiding them, Lacy and her team decided to submit JonBenét’s long johns. They reasoned that her attacker would have had to pull those long johns down before sexually assaulting her. “These sites were chosen because evidence supports the likelihood that the perpetrator removed and/or replaced the long johns, perhaps by handling them on the sides near the waist.”

Lacy and her team would have the long johns tested on both sides of the waist, inside and out, using a new “touch DNA” method that they had learned about in their continuing DNA research.
The long johns were submitted for testing in late 2007 at the Bode Labs located near Washington, D.C. “Touch DNA” was the testing method used.

“On March 24, 2008, Bode informed us that they had recovered and identified genetic material from both sides of the waist area of the long johns. The unknown male profile previously identified from the inside crotch area of the underwear [identified in 1997 from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation testing and additionally in separate testing, from Cellmark Labs], matched the DNA recovered from the long johns at Bode.”

The above lab results were enough to clear the Ramsey's and elicit an apology from Lacey.

Paula Woodward leaves out the possible explanation for the dna found on the sides near the waist might just be some male wore these long johns, i.e. not Burke Ramsey. Note: no mention if his dna was found anywhere.

Then there is the possibility that a lab technician handled the long johns during the autopsy, not unheard of.

Presumably the dna samples were complete, i.e. not partial as in the sample mixed with blood?

Unsolved: The JonBenét Ramsey Murder 25 Years Later. Introduction, Excerpt

The case continues to defy neutrality. Those who criticize or question the “Ramseys Did It” theory become targets on entertainment talk shows.

There are lots of interesting factoids in her book, if you buy into the IDI theory you will find it a good read, otherwise she comes over as the principal Ramsey Cheerleader.

 

[fr brown]

The second book is pretty much a rehash of the first book. Many of the same things are included such as a photocopy of French's police report (almost unreadable on kindle), the same old crime scene photo of the Hi-Tec bootprint, flipped horizontally--and vertically. Just to give a couple of examples.

 

[UKGuy]

The second book is pretty much a rehash of the first book. Many of the same things are included such as a photocopy of French's police report (almost unreadable on kindle), the same old crime scene photo of the Hi-Tec bootprint, flipped horizontally--and vertically. Just to give a couple of examples.

fr brown,
Sure, for seasoned sleuthers there is nothing really new. Details of some case events are poured over. I skimmed through the book looking for new, interesting revelations, sadly nothing appeared.

I guess Paula Woodward has to earn her journalistic crust, yet her claims regarding access to LEA and specific case documents are just not reflected in the book contents.

Best summed up as a stocking filler for Christmas and an introduction to the Ramsey IDI theory.

.

 

[proust20]

Proponents of IDI are free to rummage through the plethora of factoids surrounding this case, and then to erect a house of cards. However, even JR has no narrative of what occurred that would satisfy the known evidence. Who? When? How? Why? Looming over all are the GJ indictments, which were returned without the R's phone and credit card records being made available.

 

[UKGuy]

Proponents of IDI are free to rummage through the plethora of factoids surrounding this case, and then to erect a house of cards. However, even JR has no narrative of what occurred that would satisfy the known evidence. Who? When? How? Why? Looming over all are the GJ indictments, which were returned without the R's phone and credit card records being made available.

proust20,
Woodward says JR has spent all his wealth on the case, this is why he continues to work along with his wife.

JR's narrative is IDI , plain and simple, not complicated, but enough to keep the legal wolves away from the door.

Woodward also states that Alex Hunter was removed from the case just prior to the GJ sitting. This was done by legal fiat, e.g. your duties are being reassigned, X will oversee the GJ protocol, your job will be ....

Some Private Eye gained access to the R's phone and credit card records, so this information should still be out there.

Then there is the legal case over BPD trying to access the R's phone records, etc. Where did all the Ramsey cellphones go, did BPD take them into evidential custody or did Patsy and John walk out of the house with them in their pockets?

The GJ indictments seem to contradict the R's version of events, then again, if Hunter was removed from office then his decision not to file the True Bills might make sense if some other faction in the prosecutors office was intent on not going to court with JonBenet's homicide. The whole idea behind the GJ was to test the viability of a prosecutable case.

The fly in the ointment here is Paula Woodward's claims, i.e. are they factual?

.

 

[UKGuy]

Here is Paula Woodward's biographical summary of Alex Hunter:

District Attorney Alex Hunter

Alex Hunter served for twenty-eight years as district attorney in Boulder. Even before the Ramsey murder, Hunter was criticized by other district attorneys in the metro Denver area for lacking leadership, failing to take cases to trial, and for not being involved in the day-to-day running of his office. He spoke often of the terrible relations between the police case investigators and his own office, but did little to correct the situation. He complained of misconduct, out-of-control egos, and violation of active investigation protocols with leaking while he was actively leaking too. Hunter was removed from an active advisory role in the Ramsey grand jury by then Colorado Governor Roy Romer in 1998. When the JonBenét murder happened, Hunter continued his vacation in Hawaii for nine days before returning to Boulder. He was accused of leaking to the tabloids.
Update: Hunter retired in 2000. Boulder did not have term limits while he was in office. Currently, Hunter spends time in both Hawaii and Boulder.

Alex Hunter definitely knows where all the bodies are buried.!

.

 

[proust20]

JR proposes IDI since he must. Even so, there is no coherent IDI narrative that is in keeping with the evidence, e.g. How do PR's fibers become enmeshed in the ligature according to IDI? It's tiresome to be still dealing with the same old delusions and misrepresentations. Why MSM is so intent on defending the Rs is curious. In dealing with some aspects of the case, like the dropped indictments, JR's connection with Lockheed-Martin should be noted.

As an act, JR needed his more glamorous wife. He is less effective without Patsy by his side tearing up.

 

[UKGuy]

JR proposes IDI since he must. Even so, there is no coherent IDI narrative that is in keeping with the evidence, e.g. How do PR's fibers become enmeshed in the ligature according to IDI? It's tiresome to be still dealing with the same old delusions and misrepresentations. Why MSM is so intent on defending the Rs is curious. In dealing with some aspects of the case, like the dropped indictments, JR's connection with Lockheed-Martin should be noted.

As an act, JR needed his more glamorous wife. He is less effective without Patsy by his side tearing up.

proust20,

JR proposes IDI since he must. Even so, there is no coherent IDI narrative that is in keeping with the evidence, e.g. How do PR's fibers become enmeshed in the ligature according to IDI?

ITA. There is no consistent presentation of evidence to backup an IDI theory. JR is simply employing the smoke and mirrors effect via IDI to mask his own alleged family's involvement in JonBenet's death.

One RDI theory requires JR to be telepathic and synchronized with Patsy's intent, despite only having the RN to go on. e.g. JR offers explanations for forensic artifact found in the basement, i.e. broken window, samsonite suitcase, chair in doorway, etc.

Similarly with JDI. If the case is JDI why is Patsy assisting JR with the staging, even allegedly, asphyxiating JonBenet?

Then there is the curious redressing of JonBenet, why would an intruder do this, what is the percentage in that?

Patsy says she put the size-12's into JonBenet's underwear drawer, yet none were found in that drawer or anywhere else in the house, suggesting the intruder took the size-12's as a trophy on exiting the house?

Then the Ramsey's magicked up a pack of size-12 Bloomingdale's underwear claiming they had been lost at the bottom of a packing crate when moving from Boulder!

Why bother, why not just blame the intruder for removing the size-12's, very curious?

Why is Lou Smit's Foundation not carrying out extensive relational dna matching, instead of looking for suspects to make a direct match?

All the proposed IDI suspects have been cleared to date, there is none left for JR to point to as JonBenet's killer.

As an act, JR needed his more glamorous wife. He is less effective without Patsy by his side tearing up.

Yup, Ol Lizard Lips does not present well on TV. He is old school, typical CEO personality type. Little empathy on display, whereas Patsy was the opposite.

.