Day 7 The DNA/ 12 Days of JonBenet

PositiveLight

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2016
Messages
2,212
Reaction score
74
Butt print image? Here ya go - found it!

attachment.php
:laughing:
 

PositiveLight

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2016
Messages
2,212
Reaction score
74
attachment.php

Exactly where is this mythical butt print located? Because anyone going upstairs or moving around upstairs would see an intruder sitting on the ground. Wait! Maybe they had Harry Potters magical cloak on to shield them from being seen. :thinking:
 

Attachments

  • mythical butt print.gif
    mythical butt print.gif
    46.9 KB · Views: 317

kanzz

kanzz=kansas
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
1,272
Reaction score
52
It floors me too!
Since this new evidence has been revealed and now also her reasoning behind her decisions, couldn't this in fact destroy any other case she was involved in? Like ...is it possible that some cases will require being retried due to her incompetence?
Doubtful. She probably didn't try cases herself much. That's usually left for the ADAs to handle. And even then, incompetence probably wouldn't be enough to get a new trial. After all, if a jury finds a defendant guilty with an incompetent ADA, what would they do with a truly competent one? A defendant has to go a really long way to prove malice on the part of the DA's office to get a new trial. Rare as hen's teeth.
You might be thinking of incompetence on the part of the defense attorney. Sometimes a defendant can be granted a new trial if the judge agrees that there was indeed Ineffective Assistance of Counsel.
Example: This happened in the Cynthia Sommer case in 2008 when her defense attorney fell on his sword and testified that he failed to adequately defend her for murdering her husband at her trial in 2007. Ultimately, there was no new trial, as the DA's office miraculously and secretly "found" tissue samples (they had sworn no longer existed) and sent them off to Canada for new testing in preparation for this new trial. The lab called and told them exactly what the defense had said all along - there was no poisoning... her husband was not murdered. Cynthia was freed the next day after spending nearly 3 years in jail.
 

PositiveLight

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2016
Messages
2,212
Reaction score
74
Doubtful. She probably didn't try cases herself much. That's usually left for the ADAs to handle. And even then, incompetence probably wouldn't be enough to get a new trial. After all, if a jury finds a defendant guilty with an incompetent ADA, what would they do with a truly competent one? A defendant has to go a really long way to prove malice on the part of the DA's office to get a new trial. Rare as hen's teeth.
You might be thinking of incompetence on the part of the defense attorney. Sometimes a defendant can be granted a new trial if the judge agrees that there was indeed Ineffective Assistance of Counsel.
Example: This happened in the Cynthia Sommer case in 2008 when her defense attorney fell on his sword and testified that he failed to adequately defend her for murdering her husband at her trial in 2007. Ultimately, there was no new trial, as the DA's office miraculously and secretly "found" tissue samples (they had sworn no longer existed) and sent them off to Canada for new testing in preparation for this new trial. The lab called and told them exactly what the defense had said all along - there was no poisoning... her husband was not murdered. Cynthia was freed the next day after spending nearly 3 years in jail.
Thank you!!!!
Very interesting!!!
 

BBB167893

Former Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2006
Messages
13,259
Reaction score
107
All these years and the BPD knew there was the probability of a third person DNA. No one came out and refuted ML's bull *hit of exoneration that I'm aware of with the actual proof that she was misquoting the truth......Dear Lawd, the BPD never stood a chance with the powers that be interfering and yet they kept at it, giving everything they had to find the person responsible for this senseless torturous death of a 6 year old girl. They've got to be dancing a jig there in the BPD for finally having some truth come out. Makes me want to send some pastries or something to these men and women for never giving up. Hope is restored, I pray they go full steam ahead and re-examine everything.

Charliegirl610, all I can think of is Vietnam: in both cases, the good guys were not allowed to win. The guys on the front lines gave it their all, only to have their hands tied behind their backs by the politicians. So, if I were in the position of the BPD, before I went full steam ahead, I'd ask the same question Rambo asked: "Do we get to win this time?"

I'll tell you something else: I'm wondering what the FBI will say. Because if the sample submitted to CODIS in 2003 turns out to be nothing but a mixed profile, they could reject it.
 

BBB167893

Former Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2006
Messages
13,259
Reaction score
107
In the article posted, Owens says it's not legally binding. So, no need to go after her. IF a person is exonerated, the DNA is labeled as the killer- jane/John Doe. The fact ML didn't do this, which is procedure- is telling. She just felt the need to stop the train from running over the R's. she needs to get off the crazy train. MOO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Without realizing it, she's revealed a lot in that article. Namely that she didn't care about justice. She cared about "fairness" and her own ego and personal politics.

You know, I was actually stupid enough to have faith in her. Based on what ST and Henry Lee had said about her, I thought, "okay, she's got the ball. Let's see her run with it." Yeah, she sure carried that ball! Only she fumbled on the goal line. Then she heaved an illegal forward pass and got thrown for a 40-yard loss. Now she can't get back in the game because she hasn't got a leg to stand on.
 

PositiveLight

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2016
Messages
2,212
Reaction score
74
Charliegirl610, all I can think of is Vietnam: in both cases, the good guys were not allowed to win. The guys on the front lines gave it their all, only to have their hands tied behind their backs by the politicians. So, if I were in the position of the BPD, before I went full steam ahead, I'd ask the same question Rambo asked: "Do we get to win this time?"

I'll tell you something else: I'm wondering what the FBI will say. Because if the sample submitted to CODIS in 2003 turns out to be nothing but a mixed profile, they could reject it.
I have a question.
Surprise surprise!
Why didn't the FBI stay on this case? It initially began as a kidnapping and ended in murder. I don't understand why they were not the lead investigators considering the BPD were not very well versed when it comes to murder cases. And this was the mother of all murder cases. The BPD should have allowed the FBI to take over the investigation. I will never understand why certain police departments are so wary of allowing the FBI to take over a case that is so complex and out of their league. The FBI is full of experts in all aspects of a murder case. They have all the bases covered. Allow them to run the investigation and the police department work beside them to learn how to handle future cases.
 

BBB167893

Former Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2006
Messages
13,259
Reaction score
107
I have a question.
Surprise surprise!
Why didn't the FBI stay on this case? It initially began as a kidnapping and ended in murder. I don't understand why they were not the lead investigators considering the BPD were not very well versed when it comes to murder cases. And this was the mother of all murder cases. The BPD should have allowed the FBI to take over the investigation. I will never understand why certain police departments are so wary of allowing the FBI to take over a case that is so complex and out of their league. The FBI is full of experts in all aspects of a murder case. They have all the bases covered. Allow them to run the investigation and the police department work beside them to learn how to handle future cases.

A great point, but the main reason is jurisdiction. It wasn't a federal case.
 

observation

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2014
Messages
1,388
Reaction score
33
A great point, but the main reason is jurisdiction. It wasn't a federal case.

IIRC- Steve Thomas said the FBI were involved and helping (one murder for 1995) but afterAH stated he needed "to get with his people" about a GJ
Decision because this case is "political." When the political slant was brought in FBI said they could not stay involved. I got a good visual of ST sliding down the wall that say. It's reference is from his book.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Charliegirl610

Active Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
60
Reaction score
137
Charliegirl610, all I can think of is Vietnam: in both cases, the good guys were not allowed to win. The guys on the front lines gave it their all, only to have their hands tied behind their backs by the politicians. So, if I were in the position of the BPD, before I went full steam ahead, I'd ask the same question Rambo asked: "Do we get to win this time?"

I'll tell you something else: I'm wondering what the FBI will say. Because if the sample submitted to CODIS in 2003 turns out to be nothing but a mixed profile, they could reject it.

Wouldn't the FBI be aware of this? I just assumed that the report accompanied the profile to be entered into CODIS. Although I guess at that time the case was in the DA's hands and clearly ML was keeping the truth of a 3rd person hush hush. If they are just now becoming aware of it, they should absolutely purge it. How could this charade have gone on for so long???? I'm so frustrated, really tormented by this case. I can't imagine what the BPD have dealt with.
 

Charliegirl610

Active Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
60
Reaction score
137
IIRC- Steve Thomas said the FBI were involved and helping (one murder for 1995) but afterAH stated he needed "to get with his people" about a GJ
Decision because this case is "political." When the political slant was brought in FBI said they could not stay involved. I got a good visual of ST sliding down the wall that say. It's reference is from his book.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, this is correct. I remember reading this as well. When the FBI realized the sketchiness that was going on, they packed up and got the hell outta there. They were there to advise, but realized quickly they were wasting their time.
 

singularity

New Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2015
Messages
727
Reaction score
47
A great point, but the main reason is jurisdiction. It wasn't a federal case.
Another reason for getting the FBI out of the way is that they would have probably solved it. Hunter(and those that followed) weren't going to allow that.




We've said it a million timed but this case needs fresh eyes. Get these phantom ninja intruders out of the way and place John back in an interrogation room and on front street. THis interview will certainly turn out different. I'd like to see what he'd say when backed into a corner. This all should've happened when Patsy was still alive.

I'd like to see the whole thing crumble. Throw these various attorneys and DAs into prison for six years minimum and place a picture of JOnbenet in their cells so they'll all have a daily reminder why they are in the position they are in and should've been there years ago. The media should have pounced on all of this when it was obvious none of it was kosher.

If we ever get the full story not just on the murder but everything that happened afterwards, it's going to be shocking.



With IDI dead in the water, i.e. no dna. Maybe a new Grand Jury can be convened to review the latest evidence?
Now we're talking.

No more double talking jive this go around....
 

Ambitioned

Active Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2016
Messages
1,483
Reaction score
46
They're a little busy with Weiner right now. :silly:

Seriously though, they work a bit slow with their backlog but I wouldn't be surprised if we saw some action taken in this case.

I'd like to see the whole thing crumble. Throw these various attorneys and DAs into prison for six years minimum and place a picture of JOnbenet in their cells so they'll all have a daily reminder why they are in the position they are in and should've been there years ago. The media should have pounced on all of this when it was obvious none of it was kosher.

This! Thing is, we're here behind our phones or computers. We should be emailing them, for her. A few would get their attention.
 

DrollForeignFaction

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2016
Messages
421
Reaction score
303
attachment.php

Exactly where is this mythical butt print located? Because anyone going upstairs or moving around upstairs would see an intruder sitting on the ground. Wait! Maybe they had Harry Potters magical cloak on to shield them from being seen. :thinking:

I mean, really. Wtf, Mary Lacy. She must think we're as stupid and uninformed as she is. And just how long were they sitting there to leave a distinct butt impression in the carpet that was visible days later after police had been walking all over the area looking for clues - and missing the crucial butt print only super sleuth Mary Lacy could see, of course!

The ABC article is better than I expected. They interview two ex-employees about her chumminess with John Ramsey. She says that she didn't JUST exonerate them on the DNA, that was just something "tangible" the public could understand. Really it was "the totality of the evidence" - an interesting phrase seeing as how every other investigator who's used that phrase in connection to this case has said the totality of the evidence points straight to the Rs! Thomas and Kolar specifically used that phrase a lot. And I loved her over the top reference to cops gunning for the death penalty for the Ramseys. She shows no objectivity whatsoever when it comes to the Ramseys, and no shame about flaunting that bias publicly. Bizarre.

The weirdest reveal from the ABC interview is this, however:
She added that she is one of only two people who have read the entire transcripts of Patsy Ramsey's psychiatric interviews, in which Lacy said she saw no indication of jealousy toward JonBenet or any violent tendencies.
Why on earth is she only one of two people who has read that???? I find it impossible to believe she was the only one who wanted to - any poster on this forum would kill to read those. So why weren't investigators given access to that? Especially if she thinks they're so exculpatory!?! And also, who's the other person?
 

Charliegirl610

Active Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
60
Reaction score
137
I mean, really. Wtf, Mary Lacy. She must think we're as stupid and uninformed as she is. And just how long were they sitting there to leave a distinct butt impression in the carpet that was visible days later after police had been walking all over the area looking for clues - and missing the crucial butt print only super sleuth Mary Lacy could see, of course!

The ABC article is better than I expected. They interview two ex-employees about her chumminess with John Ramsey. She says that she didn't JUST exonerate them on the DNA, that was just something "tangible" the public could understand. Really it was "the totality of the evidence" - an interesting phrase seeing as how every other investigator who's used that phrase in connection to this case has said the totality of the evidence points straight to the Rs! Thomas and Kolar specifically used that phrase a lot. And I loved her over the top reference to cops gunning for the death penalty for the Ramseys. She shows no objectivity whatsoever when it comes to the Ramseys, and no shame about flaunting that bias publicly. Bizarre.

The weirdest reveal from the ABC interview is this, however:

Why on earth is she only one of two people who has read that???? I find it impossible to believe she was the only one who wanted to - any poster on this forum would kill to read those. So why weren't investigators given access to that? Especially if she thinks they're so exculpatory!?! And also, who's the other person?

The article states that during the time that the DA had the case ML and a tight team of advisers were the only ones allowed to work the case. Since being handed back over to the BPD, I'd hope that PR's Psychiatric report was included in those documents and the BPD investigators have since read this. Kobilinsky is another froot loop. He believes ML did the right thing in exonerating the Ramsey's. LW is optimistic in that all the suspects that the BPD investigated or chose not to investigate will again be looked into. He must realize this includes the two living family members that were in the home the night of the murder, right?
 

PositiveLight

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2016
Messages
2,212
Reaction score
74
The article states that during the time that the DA had the case ML and a tight team of advisers were the only ones allowed to work the case. Since being handed back over to the BPD, I'd hope that PR's Psychiatric report was included in those documents and the BPD investigators have since read this. Kobilinsky is another froot loop. He believes ML did the right thing in exonerating the Ramsey's. LW is optimistic in that all the suspects that the BPD investigated or chose not to investigate will again be looked into. He must realize this includes the two living family members that were in the home the night of the murder, right?
Along with the island of privacy they were afforded that no other suspect in any other case has been allowed. That includes all of their medical records. Im afraid that if ML handled the evidence personally, then it may turn up missing. JMOO

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 

BBB167893

Former Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2006
Messages
13,259
Reaction score
107
Wouldn't the FBI be aware of this? I just assumed that the report accompanied the profile to be entered into CODIS. Although I guess at that time the case was in the DA's hands and clearly ML was keeping the truth of a 3rd person hush hush. If they are just now becoming aware of it, they should absolutely purge it. How could this charade have gone on for so long???? I'm so frustrated, really tormented by this case. I can't imagine what the BPD have dealt with.

As I say, give it time. The news just broke, and the FBI, like all gov't orgs, has a lot of bureaucracy to work through.
 
Top