The "Touch DNA" is worthless.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#825 Sep 15, 2013
Just Wondering wrote:
He was hunched over the note while she was on the phone with 911. She was not able to see the note from her vantage point.
Btw, the fourth book I read was "The Death of Innocence". So I am endeavoring to be a little open minded here.
Could it be she was recalling what she had written? Trying to get it right? Most of her wording during the call seemed strange to me.
If you read Mrs Ramsey’s ’97 interview and compare it to the house blueprints you will see that Mrs Ramsey was on the phone facing north (towards the spiral staircase) and Mr Ramsey was facing south (towards the phone) with the ransom note between them. So, IF (if, if, if...) this account is true, then no one was blocking anyone’s view. And, for those who think that Mrs Ramsey would not have been able to read the note like this, BPD included, consider that Fernie did a similar thing, only from farther away!
...

AK

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#826 Sep 16, 2013
realTopaz wrote:
<quoted text>
Right on..and that's how the rn sounds too, like someone giving dictation. Puppet master CEO didn't call 911 because he can't act. lol
The fact John told the story of their courtship and Patsy's ability to lie is very telling. It was something he admired and was proud of, a cockeyed virtue to all but the IDIs. They must all have spouses who pilfer from the collection basket at church and giggle about when they get home. Who would want a spouse that was able to manipulate, be cunning and lie - someone with the same ‘personalty flaw’ for lack of a better term.

IMO it formed the premise of what happened that night Jonbenet died and the following morning. Patsy and John covered stuff up and lied about big and little things as routine, to make things more to their advantage. John had financial irregularities with a work expense account before he started his own business not to mention the infidelity that broke up his first marriage and family. Patsy lied about her spending habits from John and gave Jonbenet a ‘resume’ where she spoke french plus played the violin.

John and Patsy Ramsey represent the exact type of couple that could have covered up the scene; successfully. The staging was just the presentation of a 3 dimensional lie. Both using not only their inner talents but their collective degrees in marketing. Many think Patsy’s degree was in Journalism but it was not, it was in Marketing from the School of Journalism. Marketing is about presenting and a product (the intruder)- advertising something people don’t need but you want them to think they need, to believe in.

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#827 Sep 16, 2013
As evidenced by that same interview, the phone was around the corner from where JR was reading (if you believe he was on the floor), so unless PR could see through walls...
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
If you read Mrs Ramsey’s ’97 interview and compare it to the house blueprints you will see that Mrs Ramsey was on the phone facing north (towards the spiral staircase) and Mr Ramsey was facing south (towards the phone) with the ransom note between them. So, IF (if, if, if...) this account is true, then no one was blocking anyone’s view. And, for those who think that Mrs Ramsey would not have been able to read the note like this, BPD included, consider that Fernie did a similar thing, only from farther away!
...
AK
Just Wondering

Sophia, WV

#828 Sep 16, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
If you read Mrs Ramsey’s ’97 interview and compare it to the house blueprints you will see that Mrs Ramsey was on the phone facing north (towards the spiral staircase) and Mr Ramsey was facing south (towards the phone) with the ransom note between them. So, IF (if, if, if...) this account is true, then no one was blocking anyone’s view. And, for those who think that Mrs Ramsey would not have been able to read the note like this, BPD included, consider that Fernie did a similar thing, only from farther away!
...
AK
With all due respect, AK, I will defer to the police who have actually been in the home as compared to those of us who have merely studied the layout.

Would Patsy not have needed time to adjust her eyesight since the last page of the note would either have been nearer or further away than the other two; it would have been either right side up or upside down? But her answer to the operator's question was quite instantaneous.

I do not remember reading any remarks made by the BPD concerning Fernie's testimony that he was able to read the first lines of the note--which page I wonder--while looking through a window and having the note facing away from him . I sure would like to know what they put in the water in Colorado that makes eyesight so sharp.

If I am skeptical of the Ramseys' testimonies, it is because they had four months to coordinate their responses to the police. They are the ones that made the decision to avoid police interviews as long as they did. So now, their actions and words are suspect. You were quite right to say that they made some bad decisions.
Just Wondering

Sophia, WV

#829 Sep 16, 2013
Patsy may have been reading the note, but I think it was in John's hands and he would have been standing beside her at the time. And why lie about it?

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#830 Sep 16, 2013
DrSeussMd wrote:
As evidenced by that same interview, the phone was around the corner from where JR was reading (if you believe he was on the floor), so unless PR could see through walls...
<quoted text>
Yes, it is around a corner – sort of. It looks like it’d be fairly easy to stand in the hall while using the phone. I think that in one of Mr Ramsey’s interviews he says that she was in the kitchen when she called.

I don’t have much confidence that either Ramsey knows the exact sequence of events those first few minutes between getting out of bed and the police arriving. How could they? Who would? Well, some I suppose but I don’t think I’d be one of them. I’d be one of those who couldn’t remember his address, or his own name or something; I think. I dunno; maybe.
...

AK
The Truth Hurts

Detroit, MI

#832 Sep 17, 2013
Just Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
It is my understanding that the police felt there was no way she could have seen the note from where she was standing while on the phone with the 911 operator.
I agree with that. I don't believe she even needed to look at the note to know "whom" it was signed by.
The Truth Hurts

Detroit, MI

#833 Sep 17, 2013
Just Wondering wrote:
Patsy may have been reading the note, but I think it was in John's hands and he would have been standing beside her at the time. And why lie about it?
I don't believe either one of them ever claimed it was in Johns hands.
Neither could recall a specific moment that they handled the note, except for the lie that they handed it to the first arriving officer. We know this is a lie because the note was still on the floor, as witnessed by John Fernie when he arrived after the police.
Unless you want to believe that the police put it back on the floor after the Ramseys handed it to them. ;)
Just Wondering

Sophia, WV

#835 Sep 18, 2013
The Truth Hurts wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't believe either one of them ever claimed it was in Johns hands.
Neither could recall a specific moment that they handled the note, except for the lie that they handed it to the first arriving officer. We know this is a lie because the note was still on the floor, as witnessed by John Fernie when he arrived after the police.
Unless you want to believe that the police put it back on the floor after the Ramseys handed it to them. ;)
My comment wasn't meant to be taken seriously.(Just trying to refute the claim that Patsy could have read the note from the phone while on the 911 call.)

I see no reason why the note would have been on the floor at the time of the 911 call if BOTH Ramseys were involved in the cover-up. It could have been placed there just prior to the arrival of the BPD.

I never believed that John was in anyway involved with the cover-up, though. But if that were the case, John must have seen flaws and holes in Patsy's testimony. Was he involved or just willfully blind to the fact that his family could have been involved in his daughter's death and cover-up?

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#836 Sep 22, 2013
Has anyone considered that the 911 call wasn't even made from the wall phone in the kitchen? I mean, how could someone not put the receiver in place, thereby not ending the connection, and the receiver not fall to the countertop below the phone on the wall?

There was another phone in the basement on a utility table in the basement. This phone sat flat on the tabletop. Its receiver could have been placed haphazardly on the base without ending the connection. Were that the phone from which the 911 call was made, and if the voice of each of the three living Ramseys can be heard at the end of the call, would that not prove they were all three present in the basement along with the dead body of JonBenet, and therefore complicit in the staging?
Just Wondering

Sophia, WV

#837 Sep 22, 2013
gotgum wrote:
Has anyone considered that the 911 call wasn't even made from the wall phone in the kitchen? I mean, how could someone not put the receiver in place, thereby not ending the connection, and the receiver not fall to the countertop below the phone on the wall?
There was another phone in the basement on a utility table in the basement. This phone sat flat on the tabletop. Its receiver could have been placed haphazardly on the base without ending the connection. Were that the phone from which the 911 call was made, and if the voice of each of the three living Ramseys can be heard at the end of the call, would that not prove they were all three present in the basement along with the dead body of JonBenet, and therefore complicit in the staging?
Excellent point.

I have often wondered how exactly Patsy could fail to reseat the receiver in the cradle without it falling.

I was not aware that there was actually a phone in the basement. Being in that location could explain why Burke felt prompted to ask the question, "What have you found?" I suppose, though, that he could have been referring to the ransom note as well.
Just Wondering

Sophia, WV

#838 Sep 22, 2013
I read an excellent article about Chimerism and Mosaicism as pertaining to DNA. Very interesting and insightful. Makes it quite possible to explain the foreign DNA found on Jonbenet's undies and long johns.
Kadee

Livermore, CA

#840 Sep 21, 2016
Biz wrote:
<quoted text>
This is by far your most ludicrious attempt to discount the DNA. If the touch DNA didn't match any of the other DNA initially collected, then I could see your point. However when it matched the panty DNA and the partial fingernail DNA, it was a slam dunk. It is from the killer.
The DNA does puzzle me, because I find it beyond reasonable doubt that no killer would write a ransom note if the person is dead and they are leaving them behind. If it was planned the note would have come with them to the scene. We know there was also a practice note. That did it for me, the Ramseys (one of them) did it. There must be some explanation for the DNA. Just can't get past the ransom note. Why write it if you are leaving the body to be found, why take the chance of getting caught. No way!
Texxy

Spring, TX

#841 Mar 28, 2017
moonjack wrote:
<quoted text>

The fact John told the story of their courtship and Patsy's ability to lie is very telling. It was something he admired and was proud of, a cockeyed virtue to all but the IDIs. They must all have spouses who pilfer from the collection basket at church and giggle about when they get home. Who would want a spouse that was able to manipulate, be cunning and lie - someone with the same ‘personalty flaw’ for lack of a better term.

IMO it formed the premise of what happened that night Jonbenet died and the following morning. Patsy and John covered stuff up and lied about big and little things as routine, to make things more to their advantage. John had financial irregularities with a work expense account before he started his own business not to mention the infidelity that broke up his first marriage and family. Patsy lied about her spending habits from John and gave Jonbenet a ‘resume’ where she spoke french plus played the violin.

John and Patsy Ramsey represent the exact type of couple that could have covered up the scene; successfully. The staging was just the presentation of a 3 dimensional lie. Both using not only their inner talents but their collective degrees in marketing. Many think Patsy’s degree was in Journalism but it was not, it was in Marketing from the School of Journalism. Marketing is about presenting and a product (the intruder)- advertising something people don’t need but you want them to think they need, to believe in.
She certainly had her own brand and knew how to be noticed. Marketing makes more sense than journalism.

Birds of a feather.
Texxy

Spring, TX

#842 Mar 29, 2017
Kadee wrote:
<quoted text>

The DNA does puzzle me, because I find it beyond reasonable doubt that no killer would write a ransom note if the person is dead and they are leaving them behind. If it was planned the note would have come with them to the scene. We know there was also a practice note. That did it for me, the Ramseys (one of them) did it. There must be some explanation for the DNA. Just can't get past the ransom note. Why write it if you are leaving the body to be found, why take the chance of getting caught. No way!
The DNA is worthless without a chain of custody. This case was botched from day #1.
Otherwise, the indictments would have held and they would have had a case.

Since: Aug 16

Silver Spring, MD

#843 Mar 29, 2017
The indictments did hold they were just concealed.
Texxy

Spring, TX

#844 Mar 29, 2017
So, who was the third person ?

Since: Aug 16

Silver Spring, MD

#845 Mar 29, 2017
Legal__Eagle wrote:
<quoted text>

It does create contamination and transfer though.
Good point
Texxy

Spring, TX

#846 Mar 29, 2017
Legal__Eagle wrote:
<quoted text>

Prior to 1986 all crimes were solved without the use of DNA in court. Surely you aren't implying they were all wrong?

I took what was said as the detectives had to build a different kind of case without the technology.
Without a chain of custody, the evidence is useless. Also, in other cases, if the jurors don't really understand the science, it's like trying to tell a dog they have been bad for eating bacon left on the counter. They won't get it.

Now, they think telling people that it is non-caucasian is helpful. There were 1,600 to 2,000 people herded through the Ramsey mansion (all floors?) in two days. That is on videotape.
DNA could be from anyone and from anywhere.
Parched

Plano, TX

#847 Apr 1, 2017
Accumulated DNA can be from anywhere. It will not help solve this case.

How do you tell the difference in accumulated DNA and touch DNA.

Did they get charged with tampering of evidence for probably taking the clothes, wiping them on different surfaces and then redressing her seems like tampering to me.

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
Didn't the Ramseys recognize the note pad paper? (Jul '09) 35 min heatherk79 988
ICU2 's Child Trafficking (Dec '14) 39 min icu2 686
News Was JonBenet Ramsey a Victim of Child Pornograp... (Dec '11) 1 hr Tex- 46
Dialing 7 Deadly Mystery Sins (Jun '10) 1 hr Tex- 8
Is Topix giving forum over to spammers? (Mar '12) 2 hr Tex- 63
Pin the tail on the patsy 2 hr Tex- 13
On prior sexual molestation (Nov '09) 2 hr Tex- 40
More from around the web