Evidence against Patsy Ramsey
candy

East Lansing, MI

#284 Jan 28, 2013
KinLittleton wrote:
I haven't been to the forum for months because of all the personal attacks directed at teach other, but in light of the revelation yesterday that the grand jury DID voted to indict the Ramseys, I'm back.
The fiber evidence and the letter by letter comparison of Patsy's handwriting to the ransom note had convinced me of Patsy's guilt, but after revisiting the newest evidence contained in Kolar's book (I haven't read it but ordered it today -- I have just read summaries of his inference that Burke did it), I now think it not impossible that Burke did it with Patsy involved in the cover-up.
Again, I have not visited this forum in months, so would someone in the "RDI" camp summarize what most of those who are convinced that an intruder was NOT responsible for JonBenet's murder now think?
Thank you.
<quoted text>
I don't believe there is any one theory of the crime. That's the problem, and why there is a long way to go yet. Stan Garnett said it, they need more ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE, and by that, I don't mean, telephone records someone paid someone to get. That is INADMISSIBLE, and would NEVER be allowed anywhere near a real case. Charlie's article said it best, you need something akin to a confession or admission and/or something with the DNA.
egad

Walnut Creek, CA

#285 Sep 18, 2013
The fiber evidence against Patsy is pretty convincing. I'd forgotten how extensively those fibers were distributed around the crime scene. The chance that Patsy painted in that jacket--or wore that jacket to painting class--is slim. Paint has a way of ruining clothes even when you're careful and a jacket that sheds like that would ruin a painting. The idea that fibers from the jacket Patsy was wearing the night of the murder would just happen to be in the paint tray is farfetched anyway.

A recent study in PLOS One includes Xanax (alprazolam) in a list of 31 drugs linked to violence against others. When Michael Kane asked John if he'd ever heard of Xanax, John didn't answer. From the exchange, it's clear that Patsy was taking--or had taken--Xanax and that both men think that it's significant.

“BORG”

Since: Dec 14

Location hidden

#291 Mar 21, 2016
PearlStreet wrote:
<quoted text>
Mr.Levin said "we BELIEVE the fibers .......etc etc. He doesn't say that they KNOW they are the same fibers he just says we believe.
He doesn't say THEY ARE THE FIBERS from your jacket and your're under arrest.
Fiber evidence is not like DNA evidence or finger print evidence. You are not going to ever get someone to say they know for certain they are the same fibers.

Since: Jan 06

Location hidden

#292 Mar 21, 2016
Kane and others were allowed, by law, to lie during the interrogations. And they did - repeatedly.
sheriffwydell

Rutland, VT

#293 Mar 21, 2016
jameson245 wrote:
Kane and others were allowed, by law, to lie during the interrogations. And they did - repeatedly.
Don't waste our time with that crap.
Just Wondering

Beckley, WV

#294 Mar 22, 2016
jameson245 wrote:
Kane and others were allowed, by law, to lie during the interrogations. And they did - repeatedly.
While it is true that during an initial interrogation police often use lies to test for reactions from their suspects, who are we to say which evidence was factual and which was not?

James Kolar, author of "Foreign Faction: Who Rally Kidnapped Jonbent", examined over 60,000 pages of evidence and testimony from the case, and reached the conclusion that there was no intruder that night. The Ramseys, so far, have failed to bring a libel suit against him. That to me says quite a lot.
Just Wondering

Beckley, WV

#295 Mar 22, 2016
Really--Rally? Lol Sorry for the incorrect title.
sheriffwydell

Rutland, VT

#297 Mar 22, 2016
Just Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
While it is true that during an initial interrogation police often use lies to test for reactions from their suspects, who are we to say which evidence was factual and which was not?
James Kolar, author of "Foreign Faction: Who Rally Kidnapped Jonbent", examined over 60,000 pages of evidence and testimony from the case, and reached the conclusion that there was no intruder that night. The Ramseys, so far, have failed to bring a libel suit against him. That to me says quite a lot.
It wouldn't matter if they did bring on, since their suits are just SLAPP's.
Jolamom

Miami, FL

#298 Mar 22, 2016
Just Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
While it is true that during an initial interrogation police often use lies to test for reactions from their suspects, who are we to say which evidence was factual and which was not?
James Kolar, author of "Foreign Faction: Who Rally Kidnapped Jonbent", examined over 60,000 pages of evidence and testimony from the case, and reached the conclusion that there was no intruder that night. The Ramseys, so far, have failed to bring a libel suit against him. That to me says quite a lot.
Who do you think would have to bring the lawsuit? There really isn't anyone named as a suspect in Kolar's book by name. But there certainly is someone he alludes to. Seeing BR is now of legal age, he would have to be the one, correct? That might put him in an untenable situation. I would hate to see Kolar suffer any more monetary losses over this book but I would kind of like to see a lawsuit concerning this book. We could learn a lot.
sheriffwydell

Rutland, VT

#300 Mar 24, 2016
Gary Oliver wrote:
Leave Patsy Ramsey alone.
Her fibers is that all you have. She lived in the house!!!!
There were presents in the basement that she had wrapped. She may have got some to take to the Whites that night. She may have got some to give to John's older children on their Charlevoix trip. She painted down there, she attended to her children when they were done their playing in the train room. She didn't just have her red jacket just for Christmas she owned it and wore it on other occasions.
If the police wanted to frame them as bad as they are making out - why couldn't they disprove the DNA this pointed to an intruder more than anything. Why didn't they announce that the DNA was insignificant? because they couldn't. Did the Ramsey attorneys speak another language?? No - they all had the same evidence in front of them so why weren't the Ramseys thrown in prison if it was such a slam dunk case.
If the Boulder LE could not get them on anything its because they had nothing to begin with.
Great, another idiot. Maybe you haven't heard, but the Boulder DA's office didn't take even "slam-dunk" cases (to use your words) to trial. They pleaded everything out. That wasn't going to happen here.
berrytea333

Saint Louis, MO

#301 Mar 25, 2016
Gary Oliver wrote:
Leave Patsy Ramsey alone.
Her fibers is that all you have. She lived in the house!!!!
There were presents in the basement that she had wrapped. She may have got some to take to the Whites that night. She may have got some to give to John's older children on their Charlevoix trip. She painted down there, she attended to her children when they were done their playing in the train room. She didn't just have her red jacket just for Christmas she owned it and wore it on other occasions.
If the police wanted to frame them as bad as they are making out - why couldn't they disprove the DNA this pointed to an intruder more than anything. Why didn't they announce that the DNA was insignificant? because they couldn't. Did the Ramsey attorneys speak another language?? No - they all had the same evidence in front of them so why weren't the Ramseys thrown in prison if it was such a slam dunk case.
If the Boulder LE could not get them on anything its because they had nothing to begin with.
Patsy did not paint in the basement. She painted in the butler's kitchen. The paint tote is in the basement because, on the day of the Ramseys' Christmas party, Patsy asked Linda to move the paint stuff down there.
stoned luck aka lukyk9

Pico Rivera, CA

#304 Wednesday Mar 30
Steph wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, wbasemenabout her coat fibers found twisted into the garrotte???? How many times had she used that device???
What? Everything was imported afterwards.none of those items were used in the murder.nothing matched the actual strangulation hand tied bludgeoning. 350 ft#s of force drop 50#s from seven feet.the pink sheer teddy was likely what lovely Joni wore.No panties.the naked the dead.toilet bowl rim was as close a make as DrLee could find to match skull dent.No laMp found at least in one piece or in basement.
Jewell

Pico Rivera, CA

#307 Thursday Mar 31
This type of hypocrisy has been going on too long.
Jewell

Pico Rivera, CA

#312 Thursday Mar 31
"Jameson and Undertheradar a.k.a Sunshine"

It is not fair that a mole continues to bash your character yet she reports every negative comment that is directed at her. So hypocritical. She makes personal attacks on people whose identities have been made public like Jameson and Undertheradar yet does not have the same courage to reveal who she is out of fear of personal attack. Hypocrite.

Sunshine don't let a mole silence you, I'd like to see you back on Topix. Jameson don't allow a mole to bash your character one more day, she isn't worthy of glory. What she is doing is cowardly and hypocritical.
Jewell

Pico Rivera, CA

#313 Thursday Mar 31
I think we all know who the mole is.
Jewell

Pico Rivera, CA

#314 Thursday Mar 31
Why did the BP spend all that time and money in DNA testing if they knew all along it would not produce a killer when in fact they had the killers from day one whose DNA did not match.
Jewell

Pico Rivera, CA

#315 Thursday Mar 31
Also wondering why the GJ didnt accuse either Ramsey of first degree murder. If they had reason to believe either Ramsey had committed a crime of murder in the first degree--I am certain they would have.
Jewell

Pico Rivera, CA

#316 Thursday Mar 31
Jameson don't allow a certain known poster to bash your character any longer. She doesn't play fair. It is not alright that she makes personal attacks on you because your identity is known to the public. Do not tolerate it anymore. Report her every time she takes a personal shot at you for defamation of character. She has frequented your forum accusing you of being dishonest and unloyal to the Ramseys and countless other insults. Don't stand for it, while she keeps her identity secret.
Jewell

Pico Rivera, CA

#317 Thursday Mar 31
Another myth I wonder about is the girl's hymen. Was she or was she not sexually molested before that day? The autopsy report said, "erosion of the hymen". In these terms, an eroded hymen means "stretched, torn". That is not a specific indication of previous molestation.
Jewell

Pico Rivera, CA

#318 Thursday Mar 31
It only proves that there was vaginal penetration at some point.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Patsy vs Burke 10 min Ruby 28
SBTC and victory ??? (Sep '14) 18 min BIZ 8
Jonbenet... 1 hr stoned luck aka ... 53
Haunting evidence 2 hr BIZ 33
Burdens 2 hr BIZ 25
Stop 3 hr BIZ 39
In Touch Weekly on the JonBenet Ramsey case 3 hr BIZ 37
More from around the web