My doubts about the case

BC... Did you forget that CBI expert Chet Ubowsky could not rule Patsy out as the person who wrote the RN?

After studying handwriting samples, the CBI concluded John Ramsey did not write the note but said "there are indications that the author" is Patsy, "although there is not enough evidence to conclude that definitively."

http://www.cnn.com/US/9712/26/ramsey.year.later/
 
Ivy said:
BC... Did you forget that CBI expert Chet Ubowsky could not rule Patsy out as the person who wrote the RN?

After studying handwriting samples, the CBI concluded John Ramsey did not write the note but said "there are indications that the author" is Patsy, "although there is not enough evidence to conclude that definitively."

http://www.cnn.com/US/9712/26/ramsey.year.later/


Ivy,

It was early in the case, before all of the historical exemplars and London Letters were analyzed, that Chet Ubowski mentioned during unofficial conversations there were"indications" that Patsy was the author. But after all of the CBI's examiners completed their analyses, Ubowski tempered his opinion somewhat, although clinging to the belief that Patsy could not be ruled out as the writer.

However, that is not unusual, since most of the other CBI's experts could not completely rule her out either. Only U.S. Secret Service examiner Richard Dusak concluded there was no evidence Patsy wrote the note. Howard Rile ruled it was somewhere between "probably not" to "elimination" as Patsy being the writer.

Also, to keep this thing in perspective, please remember that, based on the handwriting, most of the 73 tested couldn't be eliminated either, including Burke Ramsey.

JMO
 
If your saying a fifth person was in the house that night and they took the duct tape and cord with them, then why could it not have been an intruder? Don't get mad at me OK I am just really trying to get a handle on this I have no idea who did it.
 
TisHerself said:
If your saying a fifth person was in the house that night and they took the duct tape and cord with them, then why could it not have been an intruder? Don't get mad at me OK I am just really trying to get a handle on this I have no idea who did it.


Tis,

It wasn't an intruder for a lot of reasons, most notable because the Ramseys wouldn't be lying and covering up to protect an intruder. They would lie and cover up only if a family member was involved.

Nevertheless, there were a number of items of evidence missing from the crime scene, and the most logical place to look for the missing items is a fifth person in the house that night.

JMO
 
BlueCrab said:
It wasn't an intruder for a lot of reasons, most notable because the Ramseys wouldn't be lying and covering up to protect an intruder. They would lie and cover up only if a family member was involved.


OR a very close family associate! ;)



Im glad to see you back BC .
Im feeling lately like we need all the 'BORGS' we can on here!!!!!
 
BlueCrab said:
Tis,

It wasn't an intruder for a lot of reasons, most notable because the Ramseys wouldn't be lying and covering up to protect an intruder. They would lie and cover up only if a family member was involved.

Nevertheless, there were a number of items of evidence missing from the crime scene, and the most logical place to look for the missing items is a fifth person in the house that night.

JMO


In regard to my post above suggesting a fifth person in the house that night, it might be appropriate to list the missing crime scene items that had apparently been removed from the house. They include:

1. the roll of black Shurtape brand duct tape;

2. the balance of the white 1/4" Stansport brand flat nylon cord;

3. the stun gun that left stun gun injuries on the face, back and ankle of JonBenet;

4. the tip of the wooden paint brush handle that was used to make the ligature;

5. a piece of dark blue cloth used to wipe down JonBenet which left fibers on the inner thighs and folds of the labia of JonBenet;

6. the size 6 underwear that JonBenet had to have been wearing before she was cleaned up and redressed in oversized size 12 underwear.

7. the red ink pen used to draw the heart on JonBenet's palm;

8. the nine pages missing from the middle of the notepad from which the three ransom note pages were taken;

9. the Hi-Tec hiking boots, with a compass built into them, that Burke Ramsey finally admitted owning after the parents denied anyone in the house owned Hi-Tec footwear.

JMO
 
BlueCrab said:
In regard to my post above suggesting a fifth person in the house that night, it might be appropriate to list the missing crime scene items that had apparently been removed from the house. They include:

1. the roll of black Shurtape brand duct tape;

2. the balance of the white 1/4" Stansport brand flat nylon cord;

3. the stun gun that left stun gun injuries on the face, back and ankle of JonBenet;

4. the tip of the wooden paint brush handle that was used to make the ligature;

5. a piece of dark blue cloth used to wipe down JonBenet which left fibers on the inner thighs and folds of the labia of JonBenet;

6. the size 6 underwear that JonBenet had to have been wearing before she was cleaned up and redressed in oversized size 12 underwear.

7. the red ink pen used to draw the heart on JonBenet's palm;

8. the nine pages missing from the middle of the notepad from which the three ransom note pages were taken;

9. the Hi-Tec hiking boots, with a compass built into them, that Burke Ramsey finally admitted owning after the parents denied anyone in the house owned Hi-Tec footwear.

JMO
Seems they'd all be easy to dispose of during a long walk around the neighborhood no?

I wish the rumor about John's pilot picking up a box from the house was true<sigh>
 
BlueCrab said:
In regard to my post above suggesting a fifth person in the house that night, it might be appropriate to list the missing crime scene items that had apparently been removed from the house. They include:

1. the roll of black Shurtape brand duct tape;
It may be interesting to note the "similar tape" that was found on the back of a picture. Was the picture one of Jonbenet? Is this tape normally purchased by photo shops?

2. the balance of the white 1/4" Stansport brand flat nylon cord;
Again, who purchases this type of cord? What lengths 20 to 50 yards are normal in it's packaging?

3. the stun gun that left stun gun injuries on the face, back and ankle of JonBenet;
It seems stun guns were a popular item in Boulder as many suspects had one.


4. the tip of the wooden paint brush handle that was used to make the ligature;
I recall in Singular's book, that Jeff Shapiro found a piece of the broken brush outside the home.

5. a piece of dark blue cloth used to wipe down JonBenet which left fibers

on the inner thighs and folds of the labia of JonBenet;


6. the size 6 underwear that JonBenet had to have been wearing before she was cleaned up and redressed in oversized size 12 underwear.
Very odd, no parent would do this.
7. the red ink pen used to draw the heart on JonBenet's palm;

8. the nine pages missing from the middle of the notepad from which the three ransom note pages were taken;

9. the Hi-Tec hiking boots, with a compass built into them, that Burke Ramsey finally admitted owning after the parents denied anyone in the house owned Hi-Tec footwear.
As in the shoes LHP had on, Patsy gave old things away.
JMO


Lee made one important statement that indicates they could not determine the site of the murder, perhaps it wasn't in the home?
Edit to add, my comments under the numbered statements appear the same font as the original, I apologize and do not know how to fix this.
 
sissi... didn't investigators find a large urine spot on the basement carpet that they said came from JonBenet? I don't remember the details, but I think they said they thought it was deposited right after she died.
 
Ivy said:
sissi... didn't investigators find a large urine spot on the basement carpet that they said came from JonBenet? I don't remember the details, but I think they said they thought it was deposited right after she died.
Not that I have ever heard. There has never been an area that matched the urine ,not in her bed,on a carpet or in the basement. It is difficult to believe a murderer would return a body, but in this case it may answer many questions that have no answers if we believe she was murdered in her home. Bringing back a body,"pretty much limits an investigation" , it worked if this is the case.
 
If there was a urine spot, she had to have been murdered there because once the body dies all muscles relax and the bladder empties, as well as any feces that may be in the rectal vault. If there was NO urine spot then that raises the question as to where exactly she was killed, although if she had just urinated prior to being killed, she may not have a significant amount of voiding residual to evacuate her bladder, but I would think she would have at least a few spots of urine. Every patient I have seen in the morgue always has a mess from everything evacuating the body like that, so she would have to have it on her panties unless someone did change them and stage the scene. I'd like to know myself what was found.
 
twizzler333 said:
If there was a urine spot, she had to have been murdered there because once the body dies all muscles relax and the bladder empties, as well as any feces that may be in the rectal vault. If there was NO urine spot then that raises the question as to where exactly she was killed, although if she had just urinated prior to being killed, she may not have a significant amount of voiding residual to evacuate her bladder, but I would think she would have at least a few spots of urine. Every patient I have seen in the morgue always has a mess from everything evacuating the body like that, so she would have to have it on her panties unless someone did change them and stage the scene. I'd like to know myself what was found.


Twizzler,

There was no urine found on the basement carpet.

Sorry, but I gotta take issue with you about the body emptying feces and urine immediately after death. This can apparently happen, but I think it's rather rare.

I asked a friend of mine, who has been an emergency room physician in a large hospital for about 25 years, about this. He said he has seen a lot of people die over the years -- almost on a daily basis. But says he has yet to see a dead person evacuate feces or urine.

JonBenet had urine stains on the front of her panties and long underwear, mainly in the crotch areas. This raises the question of whether JonBenet urinated before death or after death, OR was the urine from someone other than her. Had the killer(s) urinated on her? JonBenet was found on her back, yet the urine stains were on the front of her panties and longjohns. Interesting. And I wonder if foreign urine was the real source of DNA-X?

JMO
 
BlueCrab said:
Twizzler,

Sorry, but I gotta take issue with you about the body emptying feces and urine immediately after death. This can apparently happen, but I think it's rather rare.

I asked a friend of mine, who has been an emergency room physician in a large hospital for about 25 years, about this. He said he has seen a lot of people die over the years -- almost on a daily basis. But says he has yet to see a dead person evacuate feces or urine.


JMO

Well, I have seen it plenty. It actually happened to my grandfather when he died in the home. I found it strange that your friend found it to be a rare thing but then I re-read the post- He is a doctor- that explains why he doesn't see it. Once they pronounce them dead, they move on to the next case and leave the dirty work for the rest of us. No offense to doctors, I think they do a great service in saving lives everyday, but they do NOT do any dirty work (if you know what I mean) other than what is required to save a person's life. They don't stay behind and clean the patient up, wipe them down and make them presentable if family wants to see them before being transferred to the morgue, so I can see why he doesn't see it much. Also, in the ER they are usually catheterized anyway.

I make 3-4 trips to the morgue a month, sometimes more and the only times I can think of when I didn't see it is in drowning or burn victims. I always see urine stains on gunshot wound victims, suicides, accident victims, and sometimes natural deaths. I am not sure but I think it does take a little time for this to happen but I think she was down in the basement long enough to have urine stains if indeed she was killed there and left there in the spot where she was killed, unless of course she had just urinated prior to her death. Feces will come if there is feces TO come out. If there isn't any, then obviously it won't be present.
 
Interesting thought,BC,however I believe it would be difficult to extract dna from urine,but would imagine there may be a few cells within urine that could be a source. We are talking 1996,giving this consideration, I would not believe science was up to snuff on this . Wish someone knew..maybe we could send the "eminent" Henry Lee a question?
I see no one has found a source to rebut the "no stain on a surface to match the urine on her clothing", it seems now safe to assume this is one of the reasons they DO NOT know where the murder took place. She may have been returned, it's possible!
IMO
 
sissi said:
Interesting thought,BC,however I believe it would be difficult to extract dna from urine,...


Sissi,

True. It's not easy. But urine can be a source of DNA.

JMO
 
twizzler333 said:
. I am not sure but I think it does take a little time for this to happen but I think she was down in the basement long enough to have urine stains if indeed she was killed there and left there in the spot where she was killed, unless of course she had just urinated prior to her death. Feces will come if there is feces TO come out. If there isn't any, then obviously it won't be present.
I have to agree ,urine is normally released at the time of death. If there is no correlating stain on the floor then she clearly wasn't murdered there. IMO
 
John Ramsey has stated that there was CHAIR shoved up against the door on the OUTSIDE of the room where the famous "window" was that delusional Smit so conveniently likes to ignore as a crucial piece of evidence.

Wait I thought the Ramseys were liars.

I gotta admit Burke is a strange kid. If I'm sneaking down for a late night snack risking getting caught by my parents I can say for sure I wouldn't be going for tea.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
107
Guests online
4,119
Total visitors
4,226

Forum statistics

Threads
592,558
Messages
17,970,968
Members
228,808
Latest member
astoldbybels
Back
Top