A few decades ago, the North of England was terrorised by a serial murderer who became known as the Yorkshire Ripper. His victim count ran to double figures and initially, he targetted prostitutes and "good time girls". Then he murdered a woman who was neither and there was a massive outcry. Apart from the politics surrounding the case, the investigation was seriously flawed. They didn't have DNA and computer technology was in its infancy and a huge backlog of paper increased daily. Now we know that all of the evidence required to arrest the perp was on paper and if it could have been entered onto computer, it would have been quickly cross-referenced and he would have been caught. However, the biggest hindrance to the investigation was a series of letters and even a cassette recording - allegedly from the killer. Some of the top brass in the police force believed these to be genuine and the investigation focused upon them. The clue was in the accent of the killer. The voice on the cassette had a "geordie" accent - a strong, distinctive accent from a place called Newcastle. As a result of investigators' belief in the genuine-ness of the tape, anyone who didn't have a Geordie accent was "given a pass". Numerous more women were murdered before a man was apprehended with a prostitute and taken into custody where he confessed to being the Yorkshire Ripper. This man was already on record as a suspect for many reasons which I won't go into - but he did not have a Geordie accent! The tape and letters were a hoax and the top brass of the police were humiliated by their refusal to keep an open mind. History has recored that the hoaxer was just as guilty of the murder of the later victims as the Ripper but it wasn't until recent months that he was caught. A few days ago, he was charged with perverting the course of justice. This should be a serious lesson but sadly, there are people who will cling to evidence which may not be related to a crime and in doing so, they will give good suspects "a pass". I am referring specifically to the DNA in the ramsey case. Experts tell us it may not belong to the killer - yet there are some who refuse to consider any suspcet whose DNA cannot be a match. I believe they do so because it would be the strongest exculpatory evidence for the ramseys and they NEED that, yet only last week, a new member here started a thread about a man who sounds like an ideal suspect for the ramsey murder - but whose DNA almost certainly is not a match (as it is already in CODIS). Justice will never be found for JonBenet by people who have closed minds.