Posted on 07/09/2008 12:49:51 PM PDT by blu
The killer would have had to call John's office and asked. I'm sure the staff was quizzed if they told a stranger who called what John's bonus was.
Assuming the parents had no direct involvement in her death, there’s a reasonable suspicion that their decision to parade her around in pageants all over the country in adult make-up and clothes (including a Vegas showgirl costume) may have drawn her to the attention of a dangerous pervert who ended up killing her. I shudder to think about the composition of the audiences at those pageants.
Boy, the Elizabeth Smart case. There’s another one that we’ll never really know the truth about IMO.
Let’s try and imagine for a moment what could have happened to the Ramsey’s if the father hadn’t been well-to-do and able to bring in high-powered legal representation to fend off the authorities and the media.
And please don’t lump all Colorado police departments together with the Boulder PD. Boulder is Colorado’s equivalent of Berkeley or Madison. The town has been run by uber leftists for many years and law enforcement has been effectively emmasculated. It is no shock to me how badly the investigation has been bungled.
Its sad America has come to this. Just look at all the reality shows judging people based on beliefs.
Wasn’t something also found on a basement window frame?
i still think patsy did it and wrote note. mary lacy is a janet reno clone
except dumber. i think ramsey family has worked to find a way to
have a misleading conclusion. the note sounded just like patsy.
i think the crime is that the ramsey’s got away with it.
WIFE O’BUCKHEAD
Why do I assume they’re not? Excuse me, are you on medication? Did I say I was assuming something? They are not democrats. What are you assuming, you certainly are making an ass out of you and yourself.
You got it. I knew the police were on a jihad the minute I tried to understand the case, and I knew politics was the root of the problem.
The Boulder detective had only investigated ONE murder case before the Ramsays. Lou Smit (the detective who spoke out in favor of the Ramsays and is being vindicated today) had solved over TWO HUNDRED and his approach was totally logical.
The Freepers who were adamant about the Ramsays being the killers were opinionated, numerous and WRONG!
A good question. I have followed a number of cases with this in mind. It is that prosecuting authorities were caught like a deer in the headlights, with this great breakthrough in DNA.
All the defence initially had to do was to find a DNA that did not identify the accused. So far so good- indeed why not?
A case in Canada when a poor teen age girl was strangled. She was the clerk at an all night coffee shop in Winnipeg. A pair of gloves was found nearby. The defence set up a scream, saying "it was NOT his DNA". No indeed, a man was found not guilty after two trials and got over two million dollars compensation. I lost a brand new glove near a liquor store once. Never found it again. If the liquor store was hit and an employee murdered, my glove could have exonerated the perp. This using that logic.
We now know that if a factory operative sneezed over a garment, or quickly wiped their fingers on it, then packed it- DNA would be on the garment.
I am sorry for the Ramseys. That ransom note haunts me to this day. I cannot believe that an outsider wrote that note.
He was a successful and wealthy businessman, a Republican and his wife and daughter were involved in beauty pageants.
Enough for democrats in power to assume they were totally evil.
It was proven that Patsy Ramsey wrote the abduction note. Why did she do that?
Yeah, I have to say that the note screams involvement by the family in the coverup. One thing everyone can agree on is that the lengthy note was written after the fact to make it look like a botched kidnapping. The reference to 118,000, SBTC, “and hence” sentence structure, and the fact that Patsy didn’t even hesitate to call family and friends as well is all enough to give one pause. It’s certainly not hard to see why certain people think Patsy was involved. I’d say the repitition of this particular DNA sample is enough to prove involvement by an outside party, but that alone shouldn’t exhonerate the family from the coverup. Let’s not forget that the first time this DNA was sampled it was in a mixed blood sample on Benet’s underwear, not in an area where contact was only assumed - that one hit might have been a mistake, but to find it again on two other spots of a different piece of clothing? That screams outside involvement.
And the 9/11 hang up call several days prior to JB’s death ... from the Ramsey home.
The snow was not waist-deep as the police led you to believe.
In fact, it was not even 3 inches deep.
In fact, the yard had large snowless patches and there was NO SNOW just outside the window or on the sidewalks.
Thus, no footprints were left by the killer.
And why would the person who wrote the fake ransom note feel comfortable enough to write a multiple page note with multiple drafts using the family’s own pen and paper unless they either had no intention of leaving the house after the murder or knew the family wouldn’t be surprised to find them in their house late at night? It’s very odd behavior indeed. Whoever did the cover up at least was part of the family or was so close to the family that they were welcome in the home at any hour.
Thank you for your well informed and balanced reply. I would be only too happy to see the final identification of that DNA. I am mindful of the agony of the Scottish couple whose daughter vanished in Portugal. To have this nightmare tragedy be turned into accusations must be the most awful and unwanted addition.
That DNA will stand as an answer- one way or the other.
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.