Dr Henry Lee's Book

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by Sophie, Jun 3, 2009.

  1. Sophie

    Sophie New Member

    Messages:
    1,019
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm sorry to start a thread but I can't find the thread where we discussed Dr Lee's findings on the tape on JBR's mouth and Dr Lee's book more generally. Apologies.

    Anyway, this book arrived today and I have just started reading it. Flicked forward to the tape section and his opinion isn't as strong as I remembered. He says that it was a visual match to tape attached to paintings in the Ramsey house and that this tape could be purchased in Boulder. It wasn't an exact scientific match to those paintings, but another painting was removed from the Ramsey house by Pam so...

    However, I have found a reference to an interview with Dr Lee in which he discusses the case and suggests that the tape had been usedpreviously. I will try to find this but have to admit that he isn't 100% assertive in his book.

    Not quite on point but there's an interesting 'error' in the book: he says that JAR was at the Ramsey house on Christmas Day. I know received wisdom is that JAR was the best part of a continent away but it's an interesting error in view of some posters' views on JAR.

    Will have more to say as I read more of the book but a cursory glance proves that IDI are wrong when they claim that Lee was an RDI hired gun. He is actually quite critical in places of the police and only just falls short of laughing at ST and the 25th Dec on the headstone. IMHO he makes the mistake of thinking that ST saw that as evidence as opposed to a circumstantial clue but it does prove that he wasn't some sort of police drone.
     
  2. Loading...


  3. DeeDee249

    DeeDee249 New Member

    Messages:
    8,022
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Rs neighbor the late Joe Barnhill SAID he saw JAR walking into the house, and he was pounced on by the RST, who denied JAR's presence in Boulder. Later, probably in response to threats from R lawyers, Barnhill recanted, saying he must have been mistaken. But what OTHER college-age young man would be walking into the Ramsey house that day? Plus, Barnhill knew the whole family well. He would certainly know who he saw.
     
  4. Maikai

    Maikai New Member

    Messages:
    685
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lee was hired for one reason---so the Ramsey's couldn't hire him. It's obvious from statements he's made that he didn't spend a great deal of time on the case---at one point he met with police at the Denver airport on his way to somewhere else. I don't have much respect for Lee---he's a paid witness. I doubt the BPD had the money to pay Lee more then just a cursory look at the case. The only thing I recall about the duct tape was it not found in the house and was produced by a plant in Hickory, NC not that long before the murder. It could be traced based on the glue composition.

    You don't hear much from Barry Scheck--he also was hired. IMO, Scheck told the police the DNA was a BIG problem.
     
  5. JMO8778

    JMO8778 ..at the beach!

    Messages:
    5,554
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Scheck told Thomas that he was 'on his side' regarding PDI.
     
  6. DeeDee249

    DeeDee249 New Member

    Messages:
    8,022
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Don't forget the identical tape and cord were found for sale in 2 places in Boulder. The Army-Navy store and McGuckin's hardware. A Ramsey credit card receipt was found from McGuckins's showing 2 purchases matching the cord and tape exactly in price and department.
    You know, evidence like this is certainly "circumstantial". But to me, circumstantial = coincidence. And there are too many "coincidences" in this case.
    Does this mean the Rs bought these items to murder their daughter? Of course not. This was NOT premeditated murder, IMO. But the likelihood of those items being purchased by the Rs for an innocent reason is very strong.
     
  7. Sophie

    Sophie New Member

    Messages:
    1,019
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    No matter how brief Dr Lee's view of the evidence may have been, he has actually seen the evidence so I'm quite happy to accept his general statements about the provenance of the tape. I can't see to what end he would publish untruths.

    Any DNA guru will tell you that a mere smidge of DNA which can't be conclusively linked with the crime is a big problem because the defence will always use it to raise reasonable doubt. So, yes, I think Scheck probably did warn the BPD that DNA which may just be an artifact (copyright Mary Lacy) could undo the case. If so, he appears to have been right.
     
  8. Maikai

    Maikai New Member

    Messages:
    685
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't believe it..........Scheck has devoted too much time to his innocence project.
     
  9. Maikai

    Maikai New Member

    Messages:
    685
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    He didn't say he walked into the house--just up to the door. It's another question. Did Barnhill actually see someone resembling JAR going up to the house, and could it have been the killer, checking to see if anyone was home?
     
  10. DeeDee249

    DeeDee249 New Member

    Messages:
    8,022
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I doubt they'd do that in broad daylight, especially walking up to the door. Anyone planning a crime like a kidnapping would be checking that house for days- and certainly the day they planned to do it. They'd have been watching to see when or if the car left with the family inside. Christmas Day would be the worst day of the year to plan a kidnapping, IMHO. Kids are either home with their families or visiting with their families. JB went to school- she played outside sometimes. There were other opportunities. Why commit a crime like this when you KNOW that the family is in the house.
     
  11. Sophie

    Sophie New Member

    Messages:
    1,019
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm a bit distraught that I have only just got around to Dr Lee's book. It makes sensational reading. For example, he doesn't even view the BPD's version of the 911 call as even vaguely controvertible. He also indicates that Burke was seriously investigated and he can barely contain his mirth at some of Patsy's little conceits (like her claim to have bought her furniture at Tiffany's).

    Anyway, I thought I'd do a little summary of the main points of Dr Lee's book if anyone is interested after all these years.


    Separately, my sister looked out the linguistics book which was such an attack on Donald Foster and mentions ST's 'blind faith' in the latter. It's mostly academic prima donnas (of which Foster was an example in all honesty but that doesn't make him any less right) arguing with each other but I'm very happy to do a summary if anyone is interested.
     
  12. Becky319

    Becky319 New Member

    Messages:
    209
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Sophie thanks for offering this service, I think it would be extremly interesting.
     
  13. Sophie

    Sophie New Member

    Messages:
    1,019
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I've actually found this book on Amazon.co.uk. The link to the Ramsey-Thomas-Foster excerpt is below. It may not work owing to copyright verification issues. If so, go into amazon.co.uk, search 'Counterfeiting Shakespeare' then do an internal text search on Steve Thomas.

    [ame]http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/reader/0521772435?ie=UTF8&keywords=steve%20thomas&p=S0DQ&twc=3&avc=1&checkSum=MJOnBM6u31xKMS2xq2sK7q3TsHMsO8eDoFc8oqWotSk%3D[/ame]

    This says nothing new but there is real comedy in the academic egos at work, real disappointment in ST being portrayed as a fule by a w*****r (my sister was taught by Vickers and that's her description of him) and real amazement in Jameson having got herself onto the Oxford University English Lit curriculum!

    ETA: I am pretty sure that everyone will know the background to this but, just in case, many years ago Foster identified an anonymous poem as being written by Shakespeare, the Oxford University Press wouldn't publish his theory without certain bits of evidence, Foster described himself as being Salman Rushdie to English universities, Foster was proven wrong - next week's episode: Foster gets his own back. Seriously, I wish had a bag of popcorn to watch this unfold :)
     
  14. Holdontoyourhat

    Holdontoyourhat Former Member

    Messages:
    5,299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0


    IDI doesn't really care if the R's purchased these items. An intruder could've simply used them as he used the pen and paper.

    RDI cares, though. Because in order for RDI to exist, all items had to be on hand the night of the murder. It would help RDI's case to have the ability to source most if not all of the items that were used in the murder. Instead, RDI can source only the minority of items found in, on, or near JBR.



    RDI has a major problem here because MOST of the items in, on, or near JBR can't be sourced. Here's the list of things RDI can't source:
    • Pineapple
    • Cord
    • Tape
    • Unknown male DNA
    • Handwriting
    IDI can't source them either. Thats not a problem for IDI because it is not unexpected that items would be unsourced.

    The only thing RDI can really say (and be factual) is 'in our theory' the pineapple, cord, tape, and handwriting belong to the house, and 'in our theory' the unknown male DNA belongs there innocently.

    If JBR's death was accidental, then the likelihood of sourcing most of the items would be strong. Store cashier testimony, original intended uses of either material before or after the murder, remnants of either material found anywhere else in the house, or family or friend testimony. Any of these things could've sourced these items to the house.
     
  15. DeeDee249

    DeeDee249 New Member

    Messages:
    8,022
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0

    That's no problem for RDI. We can source all of it. To the Rs.
     
  16. Holdontoyourhat

    Holdontoyourhat Former Member

    Messages:
    5,299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Its not like you or I can source these things. They're simply not sourced, period.

    RDI needs them to be sourced. RDI doesn't do the sourcing though. LE does. And they haven't.
     
  17. Maikai

    Maikai New Member

    Messages:
    685
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0


    • There's also:

      *stun gun
      *Bat found on side of house in unusual place
      *Wolf dog hairs found on JBR
      *Rope with taped ends found in room next to JBRM
      *Hi-tec boots
     
  18. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Just you watch me.

    Damn skippy.

    Ideally, yes. But your rather "sterile room" presentation doesn't take into account several things:

    1) There was a paper trail between the Rs and the tape and cord. But Bob Keatley made sure that would never see the light of day.

    2) I have yet to meet the cashier who can remember every piece of hardware sold and too whom. I'm sure voynich could weigh in with his "false memory" bit, as well.

    3) There WAS friend testimony. LHP mentioned seeing that cord three days before Christmas and apparently told the GJ just that.

    4) The Rs were never searched when they left the house and Pam was in there only days later taking everything but the kitchen sink.

    5) As Henry Lee said, "we were lacking luck." And a lot of these problems can be attributed to that, in my opinion. I forget who it was who said it, but the quote was "this was not a perfect murder by design; it was a perfect murder by accident."
     
  19. Maikai

    Maikai New Member

    Messages:
    685
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    [/QUOTE]

    There is no paper trail. They have receipts of shopping Patsy did at McGuckins...a gigantic "hardware" store. Items aren't listed individually and described on the receipt. There is a price and the department they came from. Hundreds of items in a department are priced the same. They could have tracked the black duct on the shelves at McGuckins are traced it back to the delivery date, and from there when it was manufactured to see if they even had it in the store at Christmas time. The manufacturing date if reports can be believed was fairly close to the murder. McGuckins had duct tape in every imaginable color, with the most prevalent being grey, which was in easy reach.

    When you go into McGuckins, there are people posted allover asking if they can help you locate something. They do a booming business--I doubt anyone stood out "if" the perp bought the items at McGuckins. [/QUOTE]


    [/QUOTE]

    3) There WAS friend testimony. LHP mentioned seeing that cord three days before Christmas and apparently told the GJ just that.[/QUOTE]

    LHP, aka "Gimme my share", was no friend. I hadn't heard she testified to seeing cord, but if it was something that would further her $$$$ cause, then it's not surprising
     
  20. DeeDee249

    DeeDee249 New Member

    Messages:
    8,022
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Stun gun instructional video found in the home. JR admits owning it.
    There is NOTHING unusual about a bat found outside anywhere at all on a property. It is not an indoor toy.
    They were beaver hairs. PR owned beaver boots. She said she "lost" them when asked to turn them over to LE.
    The rope is featured in a modeling photo picturing JB in braids and country clothes with the same rope at her feet. PR also said she used the rope as garland on the cowboy theme Christmas tree in JAR's room- decorated for the Colorado Christmas house tour.
    BR TOLD police he had Hi-Tecs.
     
  21. Holdontoyourhat

    Holdontoyourhat Former Member

    Messages:
    5,299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This indicates RDI is open to the idea that JBR was stungunned. I thought RDI was against the whole stungun idea. Are you admitting JBR was stungunned by her parents before they strangled her and wrapped her lovingly? This is too outlandish.

    JBR was the victim of an adult male who sexually assaulted and strangled her. Almost all of the evidence can't be sourced to the house, including the male DNA found all over JBR. Its unfortunately not quite as outlandish. as the RDI scenario.

    Yeah if you're 12 (LOL). An adult will pick up a bat and put it where it belongs. An adult knows its not a toy, its a sporting goods item. A baseball bat belongs indoors or put away except when its being used.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice