Wrong? Maybe, maybe notWrong.
Cord Fibers Found in JBR Bed. "fibers consistent with those of the cord used to make the slip knots and garrote were found on JonBenet's bed. (SMF P 168; PSMF P 168.)
Discovery of cord fibers, used to tie JonBenet's hands, in the latter's bedroom arguably undermines plaintiff's sequence of events." (Carnes 2003:93).
This supports the idea that JBR was kidnapped from her bed.
You often chide posters for their sources, but quotes from the civil case presided over by Carnes has the same credibility level as quoting from the lowest of tabloids, IOW, you may find some truth, but you can’t be sure.
For example, it appears from the following that there was a rope found in a suspicious paper bag/sack in JAR’s bedroom.
The above evidence arguably suggests that whoever tied up JonBenet used some items brought from outside the home to do so. In addition, other fiber evidence supports an inference that some of these items from outside the home were, at one time, in the second floor area near JonBenet's bedroom. That is; fibers consistent with those of the cord used to make the slip knots and garrote were found on JonBenet's bed. (SMF 168; PSMF 168.)
A rope was found inside a brown paper sack in the guest bedroom of defendants' home, neither of which belonged to defendants. (SMF 181; PSMF 181.) Small pieces of the brown sack material were found in the "vacuuming" of JonBenet's bed and in the body bag that was used to transport her body. (SMF 181; PSMF 181. )
Trip DeMuth: "Okay. And that, that particular piece of rope, do you ever remember seeing anything like it around? And if you look at photo 115, you notice the... ends are unusually secured... can you think of any reason to have that kind of rope around?"
Trip DeMuth: "You don't remember that being used anywhere in the house or yard or - "
Patsy Ramsey: "No"
Trip DeMuth: "Would you think that unusual to be found in the house?"
Patsy Ramsey: "Yeah, I mean, Burke had some ropes that he would play with through something out on the playground, you know, in that, in that picture yesterday the rope around the, the fort, you know, or something."
Trip DeMuth: "Right"
Patsy Ramsey: "Always trying to make a boat or something like that."
Trip DeMuth: "This was found inside the house"
Patsy Ramsey: "Inside the house?"
Trip DeMuth: "In John Andrew's room?"
Patsy Ramsey: "Oh. Maybe it was a, some rope he used for camping or something, I don't know."
…
TOM HANEY: Next we have photos that are numbered 113.
PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes).
TOM HANEY: Which is a paper bag.
PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes).
TOM HANEY: And then 114 is the contents of that.
TRIP DeMUTH: The paper bag is a police bag and this came out of here.
PATSY RAMSEY: Oh, this was in here?
TRIP DeMUTH: Correct?
PATSY RAMSEY: Oh.
TRIP DeMUTH: And there's another picture of that same item in 115 and 116. Why don't you look those over at your leisure.
PATSY RAMSEY: I don't recognize it, specifically.
Patsy Ramsey Interview, 1998
MICHAEL KANE, FMR. RAMSEY SPECIAL PROSECUTOR: Hi, Dan.
ABRAMS: All right. So, what do we make of this? I mean a federal judge ruling that she believe it’s more likely than not that an intruder committed this crime.
KANE: "Well I think as you said at the top of the show, the federal court was making a ruling based on the civil case and the civil case presented the evidence that had been gathered in discovery in that case. And given what was agreed to by both parties in the presentation of facts to the court, I think that the court made the right decision. I guess the bigger question then is were the facts presented to the court in the context of the civil case consistent with the facts that were developed in the police case, and I don’t think you can draw that correlation, because there was no access that the parties had been given to information that had been contained in the police files."
…
KANE: "Well I don’t know where this information about the sack and fibers from the sack that were found-I mean, I can tell you, that’s news to me. Number two, it wasn’t just a guest bedroom, it was John Andrew’s bedroom."
KANE: "It had a lot of his stuff in there, and he was a backpacker, and the fact that there was a sack-it was a rucksack is what it was, with a rope in it.
Dan Abrams Report -- July 17, 2003
For those unfamiliar with the Carnes Comedy of Errors:
But Carnes' ruling was based only on the facts presented by the Ramseys and their lawyer, L. Lin Wood, and Wolf and his lawyer, Darnay Hoffman - and not on a comprehensive review of investigators' 40,000-plus pages of evidence.
…
"The facts that were provided to the court were, in many cases, not consistent with the facts that were developed in the criminal investigation because the civil litigants understandably didn't have the resources available to them that the police department did," said a source close to the case who spoke on condition of anonymity.
…
Critics of the Carnes ruling point more often to the failure of Hoffman, Wolf's lawyer, to effectively challenge or counter Wood's assertions on behalf of the Ramseys.
Carnes' ruling reveals at least 16 occasions in which the judge indicates that a fact alleged by the Ramseys and their lawyer goes virtually unchallenged by Hoffman.
…
"There are dozens of points that Hoffman has either A, conceded, or B, doesn't understand, or C, has ineptly presented."
…
Boulder lawyer Ben Thompson, who campaigned against Keenan during the 2000 Democratic primary on a platform that included his pledge to make arrests in the Ramsey case, said the judge didn't have all the facts.
…
"He (Wolf) did not produce sufficient evidence to the judge of the guilt of the Ramseys," Thompson said. "He is not a prosecutor, and he didn't have any cooperation from the district attorney's office. For everybody to say the judge cleared them is just wrong."
Charlie Brennan, Rocky Mountain News, April 25, 2003
Carnes, herself, a number of years later seemed to acknowledge that her ruling was based on a, more or less, one-sided presentation:
Reflecting on the opinion, which she issued in 2003, Carnes said she treated it as she would have any other summary judgment motion, noting that "the plaintiff made very little effort to offer any facts" to support his allegations that the Ramseys were killers.
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202429072171&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1
There was a post about the civil case and Carnes from a number of years ago that summed it up well:
Okay, let's say you have a bowl of M&M's. Lin Wood and Darnay Hoffman have removed all the blue ones. You say, "As far as I can tell from this bowl, there's no such thing as blue M&M's." Are you right?