The Ramseys are Cleared

[Wudge]

Not everyone discounts circumstantial evidence, thankfully or the streets would be red with blood since DNA evidence only exists in what, 10% of cases, that would mean 90% of criminals would be out on the streets.

Read back.

The Ramsey's behavior is not inculpatory evidence.

HTH

 

[thesleuther]

True! That has been considered!

How would you know if underwear you bought had been handled in the manufacturing plant by someone with a cut finger? There are any number of scenarios where it could happen.

But for that same unknown person to also handle her pyjama leggings.......no possibility. That's why this is so conclusive.

 

[Rino]

See, that is the type of detail that makes this case so interesting. That detail alone indicates to me that more than one person was involved.

John and Patsey

Who is to say the new evidence wasn't there proir to the murder? She was handled by many many people and the Ramsey's accused everyone they could think of through the years.

 

[thesleuther]

Patsy's handwriting completely matches the ransom note found in HER HOME, using HER PEN on HER LEGAL PAD?

That's a coincidence?

You're making up facts. Patsy's handwriting didn't "completely match the ranson note found in her home."

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Almost ALL DNA exonerations came from RAPE cases where the perpetrator was a stranger and the semen did not match the person who was convicted. So the DNA evidence was absolutely central to the case....the woman was raped, the wrong man was arrested because the semen that WAS left by the rapist didn't' match.

You can't really believe that the finding of 'touch DNA' on a victim's clothing obviates any and all other evidence that exists as to who the perpetrator is, can you ?

I'm sure my boyfriend's skin cell touch DNA is on my clothes but if I am found knifed in an alley and somebody is seen running away from the scene with a knife I sure as heck hope my boyfriend isn't found guilty of killing me because his skin cells are on my clothing.

What other evidence?

Several legal people including a Judge iirc have agreed that the case is supported more by the intruder theory than the parents.

No I don't buy that this male dna just happened to be found in the blood on her panties and they just happened to touch the outer garments as well in areas that would be touched if they were undressing the victim and redressing them.

 

[thesleuther]

All but the real crazies have an intrinsic logic.

The pedophile does not write ransom notes, neither does the home invader.

The burglar doesn't go through an elaborate ritualistic abuse and murder of a child.

The kidnapper steals the child and come to the house with plan, including a note already written.

You are stating hard facts that have no basis. You do not know these things.

 

[Medea]

John and Patsey

Who is to say the new evidence wasn't there proir to the murder? She was handled by many many people and the Ramsey's accused everyone they could think of through the years.

That's what I think, its transfer from some poor innocent schmuck who at some point touched either the panties or the tights at some previous time, and the 'touch DNA' tranferred from one to the other.

I find it virtually impossible to believe that the perp left DNA residue on her clothing but not on her body..if he wasn't wearing gloves the whole time, his DNA should have been found on her body, on the restraints and on the blanket.

I say red herring. I say double red herring since the panties DNA was known from the beginning, this isn't really new info. just more of the same..if the panties DNA didn't exonerate the Ramseys, then this...more of the same...can't exonerate them either.

 

[Wudge]

Thank you.

One fact that I have always felt pointed away from the Ramseys is the fact that they never returned to that house. I believe that if they were the killers, they would want control of the crime scene. I just don't see leaving and never coming back if they had done it. Also, if they were leading a lifestyle that had secrets (pedophilia, etc.), that they wouldn't want other people packing up the house. It just doesn't make sense. They would want to do it themselves in order to throw out anything that would divulge their dark side.

There are shallow minded people who believe they can divine guilt from behavior. In Salem, 1692, such people judged others to be "witches". However, the witches were the judges.

 

[thesleuther]

I think the odds of a kidnapper so dumb he doesn't have a ready ransom note teaming up with a pedophile so dumb he kills his victim before getting her out of the house are billions to one.

There are always unexplained pieces of evidence, random unidentified DNA under the victims fingernails that the defense will say is hte 'real' killer.

NOTHING can change the evidence of the crime being committed inside the house and staged by someone inside the house and fitting exactly the profile of such a crime and not fitting any crimes of intruders.

Huh? I hate to be redundant, but you are stating facts and evidence that have absolutely no basis.

 

[thesleuther]

I totally believe Patsy killed her daughter. I don't know if John had anything to do with it or Burke but I just cannot believe a stranger would go through all that inside someones home.

The evidence exonerates.

 

[Medea]

You are stating hard facts that have no basis. You do not know these things.

Come, this is a crime board, people here follow crimes.

Crimes and criminals and types of crimes have predictable patterns. Not every crime or criminal is going to follow the odds, but on balance, looking at tendencies overall in other cases can be used as a guideline.

In this case, the crime scene doesn't fit ANYTHING, it doens't fit a burglar or home invasion scenario, doens't fit a kidnapping, doesn't fit a sex crime abduction.

In my opinion, the crime scene most closely fits with the crime having been committed by a member of the family and everything else...restraints, tape, garrott, note...being staged to throw police off.

 

[Rino]

Thank you.

One fact that I have always felt pointed away from the Ramseys is the fact that they never returned to that house. I believe that if they were the killers, they would want control of the crime scene. I just don't see leaving and never coming back if they had done it. Also, if they were leading a lifestyle that had secrets (pedophilia, etc.), that they wouldn't want other people packing up the house. It just doesn't make sense. They would want to do it themselves in order to throw out anything that would divulge their dark side.

They had complete control of the crime scene. They disobeyed the instructions in the ransome note (d'uh, they knew it was fiction) called over many friends, lawyered up, made plans to leave, distroyed the body of evidence that was the child, did not co-operate with LE on the LE terms, allowed Burke to leave their protective sides, and left the house with their dead child still laying on the floor with only police to watch over her body to never return.

Your reasoning for finding them innocent is some my reasoning for knowing their guilt.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

You're making up facts. Patsy's handwriting didn't "completely match the ransom note found in her home."

That entire thing was so chintzy imo. Heck, one half a point she would have been excluded all together as even writing the note. They put her on the lowest probability that she may could have written it. Imo they did so just to keep her dangling.

I don't believe for one second Patsy Ramsey was some hard core movie buff. She was a high society woman who relished in decorating, painting, putting JB in beauty pageants and taking care of their 9 year old boy.

Didn't they say that the paperwork about John's bonus was in their home? Imo this perverted had all the time in the world to snoop around and case the place out before they got back from the party.

imoo

 

[Peculiar Petunia]

Please forgive my brusqueness.
Regarding private labs: it generally means they are privately owned, and don't necessarily take material for testing from just anyone, vs. a governmental lab. Just because a lab is private doesn't mean they want to deliver results that exonerate the client. In many cases, the techs that do the testing never see the identity of the person using the services, just an ID number.
Regarding the paint brush: the brush part was missing. We'll never know if it was used to tickle JBR, or JBR to tickle someone else, or if PR made it pointy in her mouth. There's ample evidence that people do this with brushes. Look at the poor women who died of "phossy jaw" a hundred years ago. They painted radium watch & clock dials, and needed a fine point on the brush. What people might know to be true--that paint is poisonous--goes by the wayside when a person is working hard.

 

[Rino]

That entire thing was so chintzy imo. Heck, one half a point she would have been excluded all together as even writing the note. They put her on the lowest probability that she may could have written it. Imo they did so just to keep her dangling.

I don't believe for one second Patsy Ramsey was some hard core movie buff. She was a high society woman who relished in decorating, painting, putting JB in beauty pageants and taking care of their 9 year old boy.

Didn't they say that the paperwork about John's bonus was in their home? Imo this perverted had all the time in the world to snoop around and case the place out before they got back from the party.

imoo

Yeah so much so that when a killer was out there and parents should keep their children close Burke was sent away with a neighbor .....

 

[Barbara]

That entire thing was so chintzy imo. Heck, one half a point she would have been excluded all together as even writing the note. They put her on the lowest probability that she may could have written it. Imo they did so just to keep her dangling.

I don't believe for one second Patsy Ramsey was some hard core movie buff. She was a high society woman who relished in decorating, painting, putting JB in beauty pageants and taking care of their 9 year old boy.

Didn't they say that the paperwork about John's bonus was in their home? Imo this perverted had all the time in the world to snoop around and case the place out before they got back from the party.

imoo

Patsy wrote that note. The scale that you and others keep referring to does NOT exist. Every graphology association in the country has been asked and no such 1-5 scale exists, so that half point nonsense is just that...nonsense!

This "perverted " was non other than one of the THREE Ramseys in the home that night

The LACK of intruder evidence is only topped by the ABUNDANCE of Ramsey involvement evidence; this intruder left absolutely nothing but some rogue skin cells after being through the house lurking and waiting for hours? Give me a break!

 

[Medea]

Huh? I hate to be redundant, but you are stating facts and evidence that have absolutely no basis.

How so?

There is plenty of basis to suspect the Ramsey's and plenty of reasons to suspect the crime scene was staged. Books have been written about the subject.

The particular post was written in response to someone who thought that maybe there were two intruders...one was the kidnapper and the other was the pedophile and that while the kidnapper was busy writing the note the pedophile was abusing and accidentally killing JonBenet. I find this theory to be beyond implausible.

Crimes and criminals have patterns.

There are good reasons why the police first suspect the husband when the wife dies mysteriously and why the last person seen with a missing person is also considered a possible suspect. Because the history of these crimes shows that these people in the majority of cases ARE GUILTY. This is how police solve crimes, they look at evidence and precident.

Its my opinion that there exists NO precedent for an intruder coming into the home and doing what was done in this case. None whatsoever. Nothing even close.

 

[thesleuther]

Think about it, WHY on god's earth would an intruder REDRESS the child? Give me a break, it makes no sense on its face. This intruder, breaks into the house, abuses the girl and then puts her clothes back on?? For what purpose?

We don't think like perverts.

 

[TexMex]

There is obviously no way this case will be closed. This is huge as it totally exonerates the Ramseys. This killer will eventually be caught - most likely with a dna hit. This is one of the biggest cases of all time. It will neve be closed until the killer is found.

They were saying last night that the DNA database is small compared to the fingerprint database.

If the guy who did this has been arrested for some reason in the past ten years and is still in jail we may not know unless DNA swabs are taken of every prisoner in every jail. Very frustrating.

 

[thesleuther]

Well, this child was murdered in her home. So the Ramseys are more appropriately grouped with Routier (sp) Midyette (sp) and countless others.

Say.........like Elizabeth Smart's dad?