let me change the question, who do you think would benefit the MOST from the death of this child?
silence for what?
what would John or even Patsy benefit from the death of this poor little kid?
even Lacy knew that back then....but still, she "cleared" the Ramseys...
all I know, DNA is not the ONLY evidence in this case.....
"let's say we accept that the DNA evidence came from a third party. It would seem likely that there should be more of that DNA at the scene....
"Why doesn't anyone think it could've been John?"
simply because there was no logical reason or motive to torture or kill his daughter ... no...
Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure
Indictment and Information (§§ 6 — 9)
Rule 7 states:
"The grand jury voted to indict both John and Patsy Ramsey on charges of child abuse resulting in death in connection with the events of Christmas...
If John tried to untie her "tight" wrist ligatures based on his police statements, then why his DNA could not be located on the cord???
Santa Cruz Sentinel
(Santa Cruz, California)
21 Feb 1997, Fri
Feb. 21, 1997 - Ramsey Update #31
but I'll be more focused on the story behind this "confession?" What's goin on in his mind? What kind of game does he want now?
i believe the statement was addressed to the issue of clearing the Ramsey couple as suspects based on the investigation.
are you referring to "wuhan-400" virus from "The Eyes of Darkness" by Dean Koontz?[ATTACH]
any undisputable EVIDENCE (police records / casefile documentation ) confirming that Patsy Ramsey was proven ambidextrous?
and one thing more......
these last two sentences sum it all ... (two thumbs up!)
friendly advise... pls educate yourself about the role of a prosecutor (district attorney) in the criminal justice system so you can tell if what...
based on her letter to the Ramseys
but what about this
"You know, noone is really cleared of a homicide until there’s a CONVICTION, in court...
not entirely true.. what about testimonial evidence from other witnesses (family friends, former domestic employee)