The complicity of Patsy in coverup.

New Posts

DIRK SCHILLER said:
thank you so much for the reply but what I meant is
with no body, how can you know that child hasn´t been abducted?
Click to expand...

They don't and can not determine that for sure. Without a body, the best they can do is make an educated guess. You and your son are in my thoughts and prayers.
 
MurriFlower said:
Yes, perfect example of what happens when you read a statement out of context.
Click to expand...

Yep...because RTC says this...


" Among the items police now sought.....They were also lookingfor traces of semen, and in the victim's bedroom,ultraviolet light showed stains on the bed and surrounding carpet. The mattress was wrapped in plastic.

The way I read it , is that they found semen on her bed and in her carpet."

=========================

Doesn't say that any was found...only that they were looking for traces....And RTC takes that statement and says.."The way I read it, is that they found semen on her bed and in her carpet". RTC should have posted that part...if that is what he/she read.

And then we have this...

Later in the book:

Colorado Bureau of Investigation technicians gave us some bad news when they determined that the substance found on JonBenét’s leg during the ultraviolet light examination at the autopsy, initially thought to be semen, was just a smear of blood.

If semen was found...we would know it.
 
SunnieRN said:
They don't and can not determine that for sure. Without a body, the best they can do is make an educated guess. You and your son are in my thoughts and prayers.
Click to expand...

sorry to write this in here, but I did get an advice about a person that possibly might be my missing son,anyone on here has a profesional clue about comparing photographs!
thanks!
 
DIRK SCHILLER said:
sorry to write this in here, but I did get an advice about a person that possibly might be my missing son,anyone on here has a profesional clue about comparing photographs!
thanks!
Click to expand...

Dirk, there is someone on the Missing forum who seems to be an expert on comparison photos. I can't recall his "hat" right now but I will look over there and find out for you.
Becky
 
DIRK SCHILLER said:
sorry to write this in here, but I did get an advice about a person that possibly might be my missing son,anyone on here has a profesional clue about comparing photographs!
thanks!
Click to expand...

Dirk, CarlK90245 is the poster I mentioned. You could send him a private message and see if he can help you.
B.
 
DeeDee249 said:
Do you have a source for that info about the coroner's assistants? I have ever seen where either of those tests were done by anyone- had they been, the coroner should have noted it in his report and listed a valid TOD. He did not, instead putting the time her body was discovered as TOD.

Officer French was himself disappointed that he had not been able to figure out how to open a simple wood latch securing the WC door. An unforgivable breach- couldn't he even have looked UP and seen the latch? All he did was try to pull the doorknob and simply gave up.
That's why JR raced to the WC as soon as Det. Arndt told him to "look around". He really didn't have to look around, did he? Because he already knew where to look.
Click to expand...

I believe the source is in Perfect Murder Perfect Town.
 
Toltec said:
I believe the source is in Perfect Murder Perfect Town.
Click to expand...

I read that too. Don't recall those tests were done. Have a page or chapter? I can't believe it wasn't noted if done, and the correct TOD put in the report. I wonder if it is possible if the procedures were done, but the results not analyzed? With this group of clowns, anything is possible I guess.
 
The 'Missing' forums, various categories, as Beck listed prior to my post. He is an amazing wealth of information and VERY GOOD at what he does!
 
Let_Forever_Be said:
We know for a fact that JonBenet had acute and chronic genital trauma. The next question is then -- who caused it?

The reason I don't accept the intruder theory is that there just doesn't seem compelling evidence someone broke in. The points of entry are weak, lack of forensics, the whole logistics of sneaking around in a house with the parents inside. Further, for the intruder theory to be true, the ransom note has to be wrote by the intruder but most handwriting experts, certainly the ones who examined the original 73 suspects, could not rule out Patsy.

Therefore, I agree it was certainly someone in the house who did this. But who?

My original question was what dynamic would allow Patsy to cover for John if he did it?
Click to expand...

Both are complicit in the crime.

It was John of course who molested JonBenet. I don't believe it was EA regardless of what Cyril Wecht says. There was only one ligature mark on JB, had there been EA, she would have had more than one ligature mark.

I believe the head blow came first. Patsy caught John in the act of molesting JB. In a rage she swung out with the flashlight and hit JB by mistake. The strangling and the RN are attempts to plan a coverup..a coverup of the molestation. There is evidence of prior molestation.
 
Who lawyered up first?

JOHN RAMSEY. It was not till days later Patsy got her own lawyer, then the entire Ramsey family lawyered up.
 
1. A. The investigators were retained by our

8 attorneys, and they stated to me that the

9 principal purpose of those investigators was to

10 prepare a defense in the case that the police

11 might bring a charge against me.

12 I hoped that they would also follow

13 up on leads that came to us, but I was

14 frequently reminded by our attorneys that their

15 principal role was to prepare a defense should

16 that be necessary.



2.John Douglas was brought in by their lawyers because they wanted to know if HE is capable of such a crime (it's all out there,their own words,this is FACT)



nuff said!
 
PMPT/pg 312:
"In answer to reporters questions,he(John Douglas) said he had been hired to determine whether John Ramsey was capable of killing Jonbenet,at time when,according to Douglas,Ramsey's attorney's weren't sure if their client was innocent."

CLIENT,not CLIENTS (singular not plural)-this was about John IMO


-------------------

And in 1997, former FBI profiler John Douglas was hired by the Ramseys attorneys to help in a possible legal defense.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14429987/



NOT to look for the killer.


----------------------------

Former FBI profiler John Douglas has conceded that the only briefing he received on the JonBenet Ramsey autopsy report came from the Ramsey family's lawyers.In a one-hour interview Thursday on Larry King Live, the criminal profiler hired by John and Patricia Ramsey to help solve their 6-year-old daughter's murder said his knowledge of her unfinished autopsy report is third-hand.
"I was briefed by the attorneys'' representing the Ramseys, Douglas said.
He said he has not seen the final report.

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/0201jon.htm


----------------------------


But Douglas also conceded that all the information for his "private" investigation came from the Ramsey team.


http://edition.cnn.com/US/9701/31/ramsey.murder/index.html?iref=allsearch


----------------------------------


SO if the lawyers and experts and investigators were hired to prepare a defense and NOT to look for the killer and if these people were hired for JOHN's defense......then......?!?!
 
so you're innocent.
you hire one of the best profilers out there ....NOT to look for the killer BUT to defend your @SS?
does this make any sense to any of you?
 
Of course not!! Which is why every time this is discussed, I feel exactly the same way about it. All great points and posts Madeline. Nice to have them all in one spot!!:great:
 
There was a website that I was looking at a few days ago about the case. It had a page that listed everyone on the R's legal team and there were a lot of people. It was a geocities page---anyone have the link?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 232 more.
Total: 4,191 (members: 233, guests: 3,958)

Online statistics

Members online
233
Guests online
3,959
Total visitors
4,192
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,150
Messages
17,964,262
Members
228,703
Latest member
Megankd
Back
Top