The "Touch DNA" is worthless.

Since: May 11

AOL

#781 Sep 12, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
Well, it’s nice to know what y’all THINK you would have done if you were the Ramseys. This just proves my earlier point, you’re judging people for not doing what you THINK you would do. This isn’t evidence of anything; it tells us nothing about the Ramseys (or this crime), it just tells us about YOU.
...
AK
I don't "think" it, I KNOW it. Let's see..we're judging people by their actions, just as YOU do the RDI. Why are YOU allowed to make judgments about us but we're not allowed to judge people smack dab in the middle of a murder?
The Ramseys were ready to flee, JR made an attempt to do so, and their child had just been found dead in their house! Are you a sociopath that can't understand what real feelings are and therefor the Ramsey's desertion of JBR 30 minutes after discovery seems perfectly OK with you?
The Ramseys are self proclaimed 'normal people'. Normal people don't call for a plane, train or taxi, it's just never been done by INNOCENT VICTIMS of a crime! If I'm wrong, kindly cite ONE CASE where the victims fled the state when their loved one turned up dead.
They were discussing the bride who pushed her husband off a cliff on the news. Reports were she sat texting during his funeral. She changed her story several times and the police judged her guilty. She was apparently judged right since now she admits to shoving him and will stand trial.
You can't shame us with your sanctimonious crap about judging people when it is NORMAL to pass judgment when presented with the facts. Fact is, JR tried to leave town 30 minutes after bringing JBR upstairs and no ammount of scolding is going to change the FACT that it was anything BUT normal and we've every right to judge him for it. Try being honest with yourself for a change.

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#782 Sep 12, 2013
DrSeussMd wrote:
Apparently you ARE lost on intent.
Also, the frame-of-reference and context of anything asked on the 26th before the body was found is moot once an alleged kidnapping turns to homicide.
Your information on the 26th regarding John is incorrect. By the evening of the 26th he was surrounded by 2 lawyers, nothing was gleaned from a conversation with him except that he didn’t ask any questions regarding his dead child.
Patsy WASN’T interviewed, John was the only one who said she ‘couldn’t’ be. Beuf said Burke ‘couldn’t’ be, and that was bogus as well. Why couldn’t he be? Too busy playing Nintendo, or they hadn’t had enough time to tell him what to say?
You skipped the 27th, so yes, the police were probably frustrated by the 28th when they still had not shown up. They were however, surrounded by attorneys by the evening of the 26th, sending messages to the BPD through the DA’s office by the 27th, and a no show for interviews for 4 months.
<quoted text>
The information gathered on the 26th did not become “moot” once the true nature of the crime was discovered. Rather, that information should have served as a basis for preliminary investigations and a template upon which to base and test the answers to further questions.

As for my information regarding the 26th, it comes from Bynum and Beuf as quoted here. <1> The version of this night you claim is not supported by this, or anything that I know of. It also ignores the fact that Burke was talked to, even if without his parent’s permission.

As to the 27th, I didn’t skip it at all!! Good grief. I clearly wrote,“So, why didn’t they go in on the 27th? I don’t know, but it was probably the same reason as on the 26th.”
I absolutely agree that BPD was likely frustrated by the 28th. I imagine that this is the reason for their considering to withhold the body.
<1> http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/09101997bynumabc...
...

AK

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#783 Sep 12, 2013
realTopaz wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't "think" it, I KNOW it. Let's see..we're judging people by their actions, just as YOU do the RDI. Why are YOU allowed to make judgments about us but we're not allowed to judge people smack dab in the middle of a murder?
The Ramseys were ready to flee, JR made an attempt to do so, and their child had just been found dead in their house! Are you a sociopath that can't understand what real feelings are and therefor the Ramsey's desertion of JBR 30 minutes after discovery seems perfectly OK with you?
The Ramseys are self proclaimed 'normal people'. Normal people don't call for a plane, train or taxi, it's just never been done by INNOCENT VICTIMS of a crime! If I'm wrong, kindly cite ONE CASE where the victims fled the state when their loved one turned up dead.
They were discussing the bride who pushed her husband off a cliff on the news. Reports were she sat texting during his funeral. She changed her story several times and the police judged her guilty. She was apparently judged right since now she admits to shoving him and will stand trial.
You can't shame us with your sanctimonious crap about judging people when it is NORMAL to pass judgment when presented with the facts. Fact is, JR tried to leave town 30 minutes after bringing JBR upstairs and no ammount of scolding is going to change the FACT that it was anything BUT normal and we've every right to judge him for it. Try being honest with yourself for a change.
I’m not judging RDI. I’m simply saying that what YOU think or KNOW you would do does NOT tell us what I or someone else (Ramseys included) might do.

Most, virtually all of your comments directed towards my thoughts, feelings, reasoning are not reflective of them, but you’re allowed to post anything you want, even judgements however soundly or sadly founded. There’s be no point in being here if we all agreed on everything.
:)
...

AK

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#784 Sep 12, 2013
I live in British Columbia. My son lives here, too. He was born here. We have no family here. All our families live three thousand miles away in Ontario.

I didn’t grow up here. I didn’t go to school here.

Most of the friends that I've made while living here are now dead (all natural causes, all but one before the age of 30) and my two bestest friends moved away, years ago – to Ontario!

So, if I found myself in a situation analogous to the Ramseys on the 26th, and if I had to leave my home, if I had the money and the means to go, access to a plane and a pilot, then maybe I would run away, too. Maybe, I’d go home; particularly if I had planned to leave even before the tragic event had occurred.

But, that’s just me and maybe I’m just a sociopath, or simply uncaring and unfeeling. Or, stupid.

So, Mr Ramsey made arrangements to leave. This is indicative of something, but not necessarily indicative of guilt. IF (if, if, if..) Mr Ramsay had ignored BPD when they told him that he couldn’t go, and had fled anyway, then that would be a different matter.
...

AK

Since: May 11

AOL

#785 Sep 12, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
I live in British Columbia. My son lives here, too. He was born here. We have no family here. All our families live three thousand miles away in Ontario.
I didn’t grow up here. I didn’t go to school here.
Most of the friends that I've made while living here are now dead (all natural causes, all but one before the age of 30) and my two bestest friends moved away, years ago – to Ontario!
So, if I found myself in a situation analogous to the Ramseys on the 26th, and if I had to leave my home, if I had the money and the means to go, access to a plane and a pilot, then maybe I would run away, too. Maybe, I’d go home; particularly if I had planned to leave even before the tragic event had occurred.
But, that’s just me and maybe I’m just a sociopath, or simply uncaring and unfeeling. Or, stupid.
So, Mr Ramsey made arrangements to leave. This is indicative of something, but not necessarily indicative of guilt. IF (if, if, if..) Mr Ramsay had ignored BPD when they told him that he couldn’t go, and had fled anyway, then that would be a different matter.
...
AK
Intellectually dishonest..again! He hadn't been 'evicted' 30 MINUTES AFTER PRODUCING JONBENET FROM THE BASEMENT. The police were just beginning to ask questions and arrange a meeting with the Ramseys downtown. SOP. It doesn't matter if he flew against police wishes, the point was that he even thought to leave. Why can't you see how guilty that makes him look?
If his Jag was stolen that night, do you think he'd avoid the police after reporting it gone? Oh hell no! He followed up on his phony burglary in Atlanta, marched in to police HQ and gave a description for their artist. You find nothing strange about his resistance to interviews with the very people HE CALLED to help him find his child..nothing strange about his immediate thoughts of HIMSELF?(and don't say he was in fear for his or anyone else's life, he said he had something he "can't miss" in Atl. Later on he changed it to getting Patsy with her family) He didn't have a meeting and what kind of creep goes to a meeting while his child lay dead in his living room?????

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#786 Sep 13, 2013
realTopaz wrote:
<quoted text>
Intellectually dishonest..again! He hadn't been 'evicted' 30 MINUTES AFTER PRODUCING JONBENET FROM THE BASEMENT. The police were just beginning to ask questions and arrange a meeting with the Ramseys downtown. SOP. It doesn't matter if he flew against police wishes, the point was that he even thought to leave. Why can't you see how guilty that makes him look?
If his Jag was stolen that night, do you think he'd avoid the police after reporting it gone? Oh hell no! He followed up on his phony burglary in Atlanta, marched in to police HQ and gave a description for their artist. You find nothing strange about his resistance to interviews with the very people HE CALLED to help him find his child..nothing strange about his immediate thoughts of HIMSELF?(and don't say he was in fear for his or anyone else's life, he said he had something he "can't miss" in Atl. Later on he changed it to getting Patsy with her family) He didn't have a meeting and what kind of creep goes to a meeting while his child lay dead in his living room?????
No one’s being “intellectually dishonest.” Good grief. And, if you’ve been following this topic at all, then you know that I have more than once said that the Ramseys made bad decisions that made them LOOK guilty.

However, in this instance the decision was to stay, as BPD wanted.
If it is true that Ramseys told BPD that he had a meeting to attend, then I would say that that would be an odd thing to say. There was no meeting. We all know what plans they had (if jbr had not been murdered). Regardless, they didn’t leave.

I understand that it is tragic for you that the Ramseys didn’t behave the way that you think they should have and that this failure on their part means to you that they must be guilty. That’s fine, but it isn’t evidence.
...

AK

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#787 Sep 13, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, it would be naïve to believe that no one posting here has ever experienced death, and it would be naïve to believe that the Ramseys set the standard for how people act. Fortunately, I never suggested either of these things.
I don’t know what your experience was, or how you reacted/responded, but I do know that it has NO bearing on how any other person would react/respond in a similar circumstance.
...
AK
Whether it is fortunate or not, I'm sure everyone here has experienced death and in many cases, deaths that were unexpected, out of the ordinary, and murder, accidents, etc. If not aware only from personal experience, at the very least, depending on one's family and friends/circle, we all know others who have gone through tragedies and death, etc.

That said, it is naïve to think that people won't judge based on all those experiences and compare what they have seen over their lifetimes insofar as the way people react. While everyone is different, the main emotions that run through you are the same or at the very least, very similar threading among these people who have suffered tragedies.

I am not disagreeing with you about it not being evidence in the true sense of the word and I'm not suggesting that it is, but when you tie it in to the overall picture of the crime and subsequent events, requests, etc. it is impossible to ignore. I also agree with you that none of these behaviors are legal evidence of guilt although it "looks" bad

I also want to add that it may be more difficult for you personally to understand, being a male. NO, I'm not being sexist LOL at all and want to make that clear. I'm just saying that (I'm a bit old fashioned) while men grieve as much as women, it is still IMO, IMO, IMO :) women/mothers have an "different" and "instinctual" if you will, NEED to make sure their child has received justice and would not hesitate to do anything to assure it is done. Before I get "letters" LOLOL, I just want to say that I'm not saying women mourn more; just different with different instinctual reactions to something like the loss of a child

So while none of that is technically "evidence" it sure adds negativity to an already negative picture of the Ramseys as being involved in the murder and subsequent cover up of the crime for those of us who are RDI.

It's not JUST the behavior which is something that seems to be used as a bash for RDIs, but the overall crime and facts, INCLUSIVE of their behavior

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#788 Sep 13, 2013
realTopaz wrote:
<quoted text>
Intellectually dishonest..again! He hadn't been 'evicted' 30 MINUTES AFTER PRODUCING JONBENET FROM THE BASEMENT. The police were just beginning to ask questions and arrange a meeting with the Ramseys downtown. SOP. It doesn't matter if he flew against police wishes, the point was that he even thought to leave. Why can't you see how guilty that makes him look?
If his Jag was stolen that night, do you think he'd avoid the police after reporting it gone? Oh hell no! He followed up on his phony burglary in Atlanta, marched in to police HQ and gave a description for their artist. You find nothing strange about his resistance to interviews with the very people HE CALLED to help him find his child..nothing strange about his immediate thoughts of HIMSELF?(and don't say he was in fear for his or anyone else's life, he said he had something he "can't miss" in Atl. Later on he changed it to getting Patsy with her family) He didn't have a meeting and what kind of creep goes to a meeting while his child lay dead in his living room?????
Hi there RT,

So good to see you again (well, read you again LOL).

I totally agree about John. He and his reactions are also very odd and when you have THREE people who claim to be "victims" after the death of their prized possession ;) and all three are seemingly indifferent or somehow so way out of the norm for the immediate family to react, you can't tell yourself it is just their "way of"...blah, blah

You can tell yourself that, but I truly feel that would be deluding oneself.

I would never have felt so strongly about John's reaction as much as Patsy's, because he truly comes across in EVERY interaction with anyone I've ever seen him talk to, as a mannequin with a tape recorder implanted somewhere. He has one of the flattest affects I've ever seen and even on LKL where he got angry, he appears to be almost an android LOL

Just my opinion

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#789 Sep 13, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, it would be naïve to believe that no one posting here has ever experienced death, and it would be naïve to believe that the Ramseys set the standard for how people act. Fortunately, I never suggested either of these things.
I don’t know what your experience was, or how you reacted/responded, but I do know that it has NO bearing on how any other person would react/respond in a similar circumstance.
...
AK
Death, dying and grieving is a science that has been well documented. It takes parents of dead children hours to come to terms with the gravity of the situation and mentally accept the death. In the hospital setting they are allowed to sit with the bodies for hours to facilitate this process, it doesn’t take 15-30 minutes. With Patsy asking the pastor to raise Jonbenet from the dead goes against all the science of what is known. It indicates she had known for hours Jonbenet was dead. Ditto for John calling the pilot to rev up the engines. As though the odd behavior of the parents where they were not actively working to get Jonbenet back alive from the kidnapper was actually their grieving Jonbenet's death.

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#790 Sep 13, 2013
I have watched that show a couple of times myself, and it is very interesting. On that same show,(I believe), the detective also said something to the effect that ‘we used to solve all our cases without DNA’– which is an excellent point.
As far as circumstantial evidence goes, the disbelievers need to look at it in the same vein these people did. Like you mentioned, they said circumstantial evidence is a little truth. And when you get a lot of ‘little truths’, they add up to a bigger truth or a lot of truth (or something like that).
Another parallel to the Ramsey case – this case on the show would never have been prosecutable if one of the suspects had not started talking. The Ramsey case is the same way. It is not prosecutable, unless someone who knows, starts talking – despite the circumstantial evidence.
realTopaz wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi Doc;D
I watched a show called Cold Justice the other night where a real prosecutor and a real CSI investigator go over cold cases and solve them. Awesome program! Anyway, the prosecutor was talking to detectives about the fact that they didn't have DNA but had a ton of circumstantial evidence. The prosecutor said "I LOVE circumstantial evidence because it ADDS UP TO THE TRUTH, and I have never had DNA solve a case". The detectives agreed.
The circumstances in JBRs case add up to parental involvment and they will NEVER get a hit on the DNA because it no doubt got there thru innocent means...by an innocent person.

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#791 Sep 13, 2013
I will concede only a little on this and change your word from template to baseline (which is what I think you might actually mean here), however, the preliminary investigation of the different crimes would also be different. I don’t believe all crimes are approached in the same manner other than at the highest level of means, motive, and opportunity. Other than the similarity of questioning people, the approaches are different, the phrasing of the questions would be different, the order in which they spoke to people would be different, and so on.

My information came from Thomas’ book, and is supported there. I didn’t bring up Burke because I wasn’t talking about Burke.

You are right, you didn’t skip the 27th, my bad, you just didn’t report when asked about coming in on the 27th what the Ramsey response was, and that is ok.(I am going to step out of this conversation for a while, because you are not seeing my point, and I don’t have the energy this morning to go through it all again) and I don't want the conversation to turn disrespectful ;) Maybe tomorrow…
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
The information gathered on the 26th did not become “moot” once the true nature of the crime was discovered. Rather, that information should have served as a basis for preliminary investigations and a template upon which to base and test the answers to further questions.
As for my information regarding the 26th, it comes from Bynum and Beuf as quoted here. <1> The version of this night you claim is not supported by this, or anything that I know of. It also ignores the fact that Burke was talked to, even if without his parent’s permission.
As to the 27th, I didn’t skip it at all!! Good grief. I clearly wrote,“So, why didn’t they go in on the 27th? I don’t know, but it was probably the same reason as on the 26th.”
I absolutely agree that BPD was likely frustrated by the 28th. I imagine that this is the reason for their considering to withhold the body.
<1> http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/09101997bynumabc...
...
AK

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#792 Sep 13, 2013
moonjack wrote:
<quoted text>
Death, dying and grieving is a science that has been well documented. It takes parents of dead children hours to come to terms with the gravity of the situation and mentally accept the death. In the hospital setting they are allowed to sit with the bodies for hours to facilitate this process, it doesn’t take 15-30 minutes. With Patsy asking the pastor to raise Jonbenet from the dead goes against all the science of what is known. It indicates she had known for hours Jonbenet was dead. Ditto for John calling the pilot to rev up the engines. As though the odd behavior of the parents where they were not actively working to get Jonbenet back alive from the kidnapper was actually their grieving Jonbenet's death.
Good post MJ

In addition, when Fleet yelled to call an ambulance, nobody moved, ESPECIALLY PATSY. If a mother hears "call an ambulance" when your child is found, the FIRST thing,(sorry AK) ANY parent, or any human being will assume is that the child is alive.

Patsy did NOT come running to see if her baby was okay or "how she was". She knew she was already dead.

That little tidbit seems to be omitted every time some people discuss that part of the events

Since: May 11

AOL

#793 Sep 13, 2013
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
Good post MJ
In addition, when Fleet yelled to call an ambulance, nobody moved, ESPECIALLY PATSY. If a mother hears "call an ambulance" when your child is found, the FIRST thing,(sorry AK) ANY parent, or any human being will assume is that the child is alive.
Patsy did NOT come running to see if her baby was okay or "how she was". She knew she was already dead.
That little tidbit seems to be omitted every time some people discuss that part of the events
Hi Cap:D
I haven't forgotten that 'tidbit' at all. I haven't forgotten Patsy's splayed fingered view of the cop after searching the basement, either. The apologists have tried with all their might to twist that one fact into myth, but I do believe it's in the police report. Not the actions of a mother but of a person with guilty knowledge expecting the boom to lower at any minute.
Both parents behaved like anything but. The IDI automatons will never concede the Ramseys behavior was suspect with all their 'everyone grieves differently' crap, but catch their posts on other murders and they judge and suspect just like anyone else.
I DO KNOW how I'd react to find someone I love dead, and I sure wouldn't leave them laying in my living room floor while I fly around the country. I am telling you, I wouldn't be able to dial the phone or think about the next 10 minutes, I'd be too distraught. I KNOW I couldn't lie on an air mattress in front of a group and ultimately turn out a list of needs from the house. I KNOW the last thing I'd think about would be golf clubs and cashmere coats. lol I KNOW I could never be sooooooooooo 'normal!
Just Wondering

Sophia, WV

#794 Sep 13, 2013
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
Good post MJ
In addition, when Fleet yelled to call an ambulance, nobody moved, ESPECIALLY PATSY. If a mother hears "call an ambulance" when your child is found, the FIRST thing,(sorry AK) ANY parent, or any human being will assume is that the child is alive.
Patsy did NOT come running to see if her baby was okay or "how she was". She knew she was already dead.
That little tidbit seems to be omitted every time some people discuss that part of the events
Excellent point. A call for an ambulance should have been taken as good news, and elicited an immediate response from the mother.

Also, concerning Patsy's 911 call the morning of the "kidnapping", she had no problem giving her address or the acronym of the kidnappers. One of the books pointed out that when some of the people working the case were asked, they were still having trouble getting the letters in the correct sequence.(I know, IDIs, that just proves how incompetent the force was. Right? Lol)

The one time it was necessary for me to call 911 for my family, I am embarrassed to say, I gave my old home address. And we hadn't lived there in years. But my mind was in such a dither that I blurted out the first address it could come up with. I immediately realized and gave them the correct address. So I often wondered if this was a fairly normal occurrence. And, apparently, it is quite common that people have to stop and think of their address due to the drama that is playing out in their lives at that moment.

The police seemed to find it unusual that Patsy was calm headed enough not only to state her address with no problem but also SBTC in correct order. An amazing feat, especially given the fact that she had merely scanned the ransom letter.

BTW, in case anyone should assume I am an hysterical individual, when it comes to someone else's trauma, I remain calm and helpful until the emergency is over. IT WAS ONLY WHEN MY OWN FAMILY'S WELL BEING WAS THREATENED THAT MY MIND TOOK A BRIEF VACATION.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#795 Sep 13, 2013
Seemed dumfounded for CEO John to slip one of the loops off her wrist and take the little piece of tape off her mouth when it was the dang cord around her neck that was the cause of her condition. That’s about as ridiculous as trimming a hangnail of a hand that has just been amputated in a car accident but I guess he probably had trouble putting it on and knew it would be a time consuming nuisance to remove.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#796 Sep 13, 2013
Just Wondering wrote:
The one time it was necessary for me to call 911 for my family, I am embarrassed to say, I gave my old home address. And we hadn't lived there in years. But my mind was in such a dither that I blurted out the first address it could come up with. I immediately realized and gave them the correct address. So I often wondered if this was a fairly normal occurrence. And, apparently, it is quite common that people have to stop and think of their address due to the drama that is playing out in their lives at that moment.
At least you dialed 911 - I awoke in the middle of the night to my basement being broken into and call 411 for help.
Just Wondering

Sophia, WV

#797 Sep 13, 2013
I love it when people judge my posts as spam or nuts, but they cannot refute what I have said because the evidence is on my side.

Judge me "nuts" if what I have said is baseless. Or "spam" if I am deliberately misleading.

What I have posted has been reported as truth by the BPD. They are the ones you should have an issue with, then, not me. ;)
robert

Yellowknife, Canada

#798 Sep 13, 2013
Just Wondering wrote:
I love it when people judge my posts as spam or nuts, but they cannot refute what I have said because the evidence is on my side.
Judge me "nuts" if what I have said is baseless. Or "spam" if I am deliberately misleading.
What I have posted has been reported as truth by the BPD. They are the ones you should have an issue with, then, not me. ;)
-- Don't worry about the icons- your doing fine--As an IDI I still like to hear someone esle's take on things.

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#799 Sep 14, 2013
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
Whether it is fortunate or not, I'm sure everyone here has experienced death and in many cases, deaths that were unexpected, out of the ordinary, and murder, accidents, etc. If not aware only from personal experience, at the very least, depending on one's family and friends/circle, we all know others who have gone through tragedies and death, etc.
That said, it is naïve to think that people won't judge based on all those experiences and compare what they have seen over their lifetimes insofar as the way people react. While everyone is different, the main emotions that run through you are the same or at the very least, very similar threading among these people who have suffered tragedies.
I am not disagreeing with you about it not being evidence in the true sense of the word and I'm not suggesting that it is, but when you tie it in to the overall picture of the crime and subsequent events, requests, etc. it is impossible to ignore. I also agree with you that none of these behaviors are legal evidence of guilt although it "looks" bad
I also want to add that it may be more difficult for you personally to understand, being a male. NO, I'm not being sexist LOL at all and want to make that clear. I'm just saying that (I'm a bit old fashioned) while men grieve as much as women, it is still IMO, IMO, IMO :) women/mothers have an "different" and "instinctual" if you will, NEED to make sure their child has received justice and would not hesitate to do anything to assure it is done. Before I get "letters" LOLOL, I just want to say that I'm not saying women mourn more; just different with different instinctual reactions to something like the loss of a child
So while none of that is technically "evidence" it sure adds negativity to an already negative picture of the Ramseys as being involved in the murder and subsequent cover up of the crime for those of us who are RDI.
It's not JUST the behavior which is something that seems to be used as a bash for RDIs, but the overall crime and facts, INCLUSIVE of their behavior
This was a nicely reasoned post, Capricorn. I sort of agree with most everything you said here. Sort of.:)
...

AK

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#800 Sep 14, 2013
DrSeussMd wrote:
I have watched that show a couple of times myself, and it is very interesting. On that same show,(I believe), the detective also said something to the effect that ‘we used to solve all our cases without DNA’– which is an excellent point.
As far as circumstantial evidence goes, the disbelievers need to look at it in the same vein these people did. Like you mentioned, they said circumstantial evidence is a little truth. And when you get a lot of ‘little truths’, they add up to a bigger truth or a lot of truth (or something like that).
Another parallel to the Ramsey case – this case on the show would never have been prosecutable if one of the suspects had not started talking. The Ramsey case is the same way. It is not prosecutable, unless someone who knows, starts talking – despite the circumstantial evidence.
<quoted text>
“we used to solve all our cases without DNA” I guess that explains why DNA has so often been used to exonerate so many innocent people that were wrongly tried and convicted.
...

AK

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
20th anniversary: JonBenet Ramsey case 2 min Heloise 31
IF (keep an open mind) it WAS NOT Patsy... 12 min Stoned luck aka l... 31
Name of friend who cut ties with Patsy Ramsey 25 min Heloise 5
Polygraph Questions for John Ramsey (Jan '09) 35 min moonjack 89
The Pineapple Digestion Timeline (Aug '09) 48 min Stoned luck aka l... 764
News The Case Of: JonBenet Ramsay: Watch the Eerie T... 1 hr Stoned luck aka l... 16
Dr Phils credibility 2 hr gotgum 4
Anyone believe the ramseys didn't do the crime?? 8 hr Undrtheradar 86
It always leads back to Burke (Oct '11) 17 hr Jolamom 208
More from around the web