Posted on 07/09/2008 12:49:51 PM PDT by blu
Doesn’t this just show you the power of the media. What about Richard Jewel? Another heartbreaking case. I went along with the mob on that one, I thought he did it too. The media painted a “profile” for us and I bought it.
That case more then any other opened my eyes to the reality of the media. When the Duke false rape accusation case hit the news, I was ready to ask...”WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE?”
This is Yates, stand down! I repeat, stand down! Suspect is not black!
Yup. The two-and-a-half-page ransom note, not to mention the "test" notes, started then thrown away. Why would a stranger kill her then hang around to do all that? And that's just one of MANY questions. Like what about the scene and the body being contaminated by many people? Of course there is non-Ramsey DNA on Jon Benet!
This supposed clearing of the Ramseys smells of certain Boulder powers-that-be trying to rid themselves of a troublesome case. Unfortunately, most of America knows next to nothing about this case and will buy it.
LOL LOL LOL
I am imagining all the sleuths that had this case figured out. Burke did it, Patsy did it, John did it, etc. As we can see from this thread, they are in denial.
Then I read the Vanity Fair article on the hell he went thru and the disgusting actions of the police and the FBI.
I know Vanity Fair is a liberal mag but they do their crime right. They go for the facts. That was what opened my eyes to the Ramseys and the injustice they have suffered.
This is about the pathetic District Attorney Mary Lacy clearing her legacy as she exits stage left. Nothing more.
Just because the media screws up sometimes doesn't mean they screwed up here. Consider the politics of this. I don't know if you know the many details of this case, but this clearing of the Ramseys smells -- politically. The only person who suffered an injustice here is Jon Benet.
You got it!
Good! I never though that the parents did it, especially the mother. I was in the minority here, I think.
Do you have any idea of the lies that the media reported as fact?
There are a lot of those. And if you look at all the evidence, an intruder is the most logical suspect.
I'd love to hear your ideas on how, given what we know about this case, the intruder theory is logical.
Evidence.
The window, the DNA, the lack of motive for the parents to kill their daughter, etc. etc.
Now care to share what evidence you have that they are guilty?
I admit I always suspected the mom in a fit
or the boy from jealousy.
poor kid/poor woman
Huh? You have to do more than list a few items without explanation. Let's start with the DNA. How does discovery of skin-cell DNA on the underwear EXCLUDE the Ramseys? Did you know that the police tested five unopened packages of Jon Benet's type of underwear (from the factory) and found male DNA on three of them? Do you have any idea how many people touched her underwear after her father, mother, and neighbors contaminated the scene?
“Thus, no footprints were left by the killer.”
What about the cobwebs inside the windows that were not disturbed or a motive?
Per the DA, the newly tested DNA was collected from three places on her underwear & her longjohns & matched the DNA previously found under her fingernails; all four samples were of the same unidentified male. You're not claiming the chinese factory worker who packed her underwear also conveniently happened to pack her longjohns from another label? How'd it also get under nails for pete's sake?
From a CNN report today:
Late last year, Lacy ordered a test using new methodology known as "touch" testing on genetic material found on a pair of long johns that had been pulled up over the girl's underwear. That material matched DNA that was found on the girl's underwear and under her fingernails in a test conducted in 1998. The DNA belongs to an unidentified man, Lacy said.
“I’d love to hear your ideas on how, given what we know about this case, the intruder theory is logical.”
Well, a slander case was tried to a federal judge and, after hearing all the evidence first hand (before even this DNA evidence -— which is on multiple articles of clothing at key points for an attacker) came to that conclusion.
While I am not a huge fan of judges, I am loathe to second-guess a trier-of-fact -— as they are right most of the time.
And . . . ? So where's the new evidence that clears the Ramseys? There's nothing that tells us anything new here. Just a screw-up Boulder DA who's been in the tank for the Ramsays all along and wants all this behind her.
Lacey is a joke in Colorado, and everyone from prosecutors to forensic scientists are calling her press conference at best "unprecedented" and at worst a "travesty."
Where has common sense gone? How does this "touch" DNA, which could easily be transfered from person to object and onto yet another person clear the Ramseys? How does it explain, for instance, the ransom note?
Let's look at that note. First, some stranger supposedly breaks into the house (through a broken window too small for an adult and not found to be broken on first examination), finds JonBenet's room in the rabbit warren that was that house, and kills her.
Second, rather than running, the killer then sits down to write a draft of a ransom note and then the full 2 1/2 page ransom note. He murders her then sits in the house, with the family supposedly asleep, writing a ransom note he knows he can't collect on.
Third, the note said that the kidnapper was watching the house and if the Ramsays so much as spoke to a "dog," let alone called the police, Jon Benet would be "beheaded." So what do they do? They call two sets of neighbors, their pastor, then the police. And police cars park right out front. Hmm, doesn't seem the note bothered the Ramsays much, does it?
Here's more for you. Why was Patsy Ramsay wearing, at 5:30 a.m. the same thing she wore at the party the night before and why had she applied new makeup over her old? She claimed she undressed and went to bed. And why did the Ramsays lie about Burke being awake at the time? Why did they lie about something as seemingly simple as Jon Benet going directly to bed after the party (they said she did -- she didn't). Why were the batteries in the flashlight that smashed her skull wiped clean?
Not enough? Okay, why did Patsy's mother say the handwriting on the ransom note looked like Patsy's? Why did the CBI call it an 82% match? How did the mysterious intruder know where to find Patsy's paintbrush?
I remember watching Polly Klass's father being interviewed on TV after his daughter's death. The police at first suspected him, and he basically said "Have at me." He told them to ask anything, to shove a camera up his **s if they had to. To this day he's suspicious of parents of murdered children who evade police questions, let alone outright friggin lie. It's not normal, he says. And again, common sense tells you that.
The point is that there is no new evidence sufficient to clear anyone, and there's plenty of evidence pointing at the Ramsays. If you want to be lead around the nose by the mainstream media (which knows virtually nothing about this case), fine. Not me.
Cobwebs?
That is another myth. There might have been cobwebs in the corners but there were no cobwebs across the window.
There was a scuff mark on the wall under the window.
There was a suitcase set sitting under that very same window. The suitcase was out of place. The suitcase was most likely used as a stepstool, in order for the perp to climb back out the window.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.