Page 4 of 24 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 37 to 48 of 279
  1. #37

    Default

    Of course she does. She has said many times she "consulted" with Tracey on his crocs. And we know the first time we saw the DNA test results was on one of Tracey's crocs. Someone put them up from a screen capture, probably Why Nut, and then jams put them up on her forum, as well, same screen capture. They discussed them at length at the swamp, as did we, trying to decipher them, as to who was excluded, whose names were blacked out, etc.

    Now that I think about it, how telling that the people's names they didn't want to SHOW as excluded were NOT RAMSEYS, but others they love to discuss as suspects.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  2. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Born under a bad sign.
    Posts
    491

    Default

    Sadly, jameson has gone deaf. She writes:
    No matter how the BORG try to ignore it, the fact is, there is foreign DNA and the authorities believe it came from the killer - - not the factory but the killer.
    Obviously she was unable to hear Mary Lacy say, "THE DNA MIGHT BE AN ARTIFACT".

  3. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStrat
    Sadly, jameson has gone deaf. She writes:

    Obviously she was unable to hear Mary Lacy say, "THE DNA MIGHT BE AN ARTIFACT".
    Gone deaf...been dumb....

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  4. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    I'm glad to see that the new forum has much higher standards than jameson's. Not only do they permit links to sources - they encourage it! Hallelujah! Of course, there are educated people running the new forum and they know that in the real world of research and investigation, claims of fact aren't worth a button if they aren't backed up with sources!

    jameson must be living in cloud cuckoo land if she thinks no-one sees through her attempts to censor facts.

    jameson always claimed that she didn't allow links to BORG sites because they would substitute the link for porn (utter garbage). Now she's claiming that she doesn't permit links to the Wiki because it's "full of BORG misinformation" - eh? No matter how many times she's been told that the beauty of a Wiki is that anyone can correct misinformation and that this means her too - she persists in her attacks against the Wiki. She claims that she went in and corrected misinformtion once and that next day "BORG" put it back to what it was. Now it seems clear that the Wiki jameson was referring to wasn't Miss Marple's Wiki but that doesn't stop her attacking Miss Marple or his Wiki. She calls him "BORG to the bone" - laughable because he is definitely not! Not even slightly. He has always been IDI and irritatingly (to me) even leans towards RST.

    "Alter" watch - any new hats and hats which registered a while ago but rarely posted may now come out of the woodwork to post ;-)
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  5. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    ell the new forum has already got approaching 50 members whilst jameson's is as dead as a dodo.

    Alas the new forum has already degenerated into sarcasm and insults towards RDI theorists - despite their claims that this new, superior forum would remain above such behaviour.

    It took them ...what? ... about two weeks to revert to form? ROFL! (Why am I surprised?)
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  6. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Born under a bad sign.
    Posts
    491

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayelles
    Alas the new forum has already degenerated into sarcasm and insults towards RDI theorists - despite their claims that this new, superior forum would remain above such behaviour.
    Did you expect anything less? The intruder theory never stands up against the evidence and common sense, so the only way they can defend it is to reply in scarcasm, half-truths, and fabricated myths.
    Isn't it funny how jameson's forum had to rely on hir 'secret sources' to spin the case facts, and the new forum relies on Mame's 'secret sources'.

  7. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStrat
    Did you expect anything less? The intruder theory never stands up against the evidence and common sense, so the only way they can defend it is to reply in scarcasm, half-truths, and fabricated myths.
    Isn't it funny how jameson's forum had to rely on hir 'secret sources' to spin the case facts, and the new forum relies on Mame's 'secret sources'.
    You all have persmission to tell me "I told you so". I admit I had been willing to give the BOD.
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  8. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayelles
    You all have persmission to tell me "I told you so". I admit I had been willing to give the BOD.
    I told you so. That's two kippers for you.

  9. #45

    Default

    Well, I don't think I told anyone so. In spite of mame and other routine RST there at the new forum, I allowed myself to entertain the idea that if we could erase the 10 years of bitter argument and bad behavior on the JB forums, eliminating the growing pains that came along with the new internet message boards, emails, research opportunities, etc., it might be possible to see this case discussed with more civility and less animosity.

    Guess I was wrong. Do I get the kipper, too?

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  10. #46
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default



    Allow me!
    "We're not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be." - C.S. Lewis

    MY OPINIONS - DO NOT COPY THEM ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET!

  11. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    jameson is answering e-mails on her forum and I'd like to add to her reply to "Wendy" (if she really exists - I have long suspected that jameson fabricates a lot of the e-mails she responds to).

    My additions in bold:-

    The parents' didn't write the ransom note - The handwriting didn't match. DA Alex Hunter made that clear.

    The experts disagree about the handwriting evidence. Some say neither Ramsey wrote the note. Some exclude John but say they cannot exclude Patsy. Some say Patsy wrote the note. One says John wrote the note.

    They didn't own cord or tape that matched the cord and tape on the body.

    It is more factual to say that cord and tape matching those used in the murder were not found in the Ramsey residence. However, these items are believed to have been purchased at a local store (McGuckins). There is evidence that Patsy made a transaction at that store for items which these in price shortly before the murder. However, although the prices matched, we do not know if the purchased items were tape and cord or some other items which were sold for the same price.

    They didn't own a stun gun.

    It has not been proved that a stungun was used. Experts disagree on this. The leading expert on stunguns (Robert Stratbucker) says no.

    They had no motive or history of such character.

    That depends what you are talking about. They may have no known history of abusing their children, but many people believe this was a tragic accident followed by a cover-up. John Ramsey certainly has a history of lying to cover his :(:(:(!

    DNA is being used to clear suspects - - and the same DNA - - the DNA mixed with her blood in her panties and found under her nails - does NOT belong to the parents. If it clears Karr and Wolf, it clears the parents.

    The "same DNA"..... No. There are two points here. You will read NOWHERE other than at jameson's, that the fingernail DNA and underwear DNA is the same - i.e. "a match". Trust me when I say that if they were truly a match it would change everything. The Ramseys would be cleared and the pro-Ramsey investigators would be screaming this match from the highest rooftops. They aren't. Instead, they do NOT claim the fingernail and underwear is a match and they admit that the DNA may not even be the killer's. Experts have been saying this for years, but in the last two years, we have had this confirmed by both Tom Bennett and more recently by Mary Lacy. The fact is that DNA may be unrelated to the murder.

    Since the evidence points to an intruder - - and DA Mary Lacy has said so publicly - - WHY would we waste our time discussing the parents as guilty?

    The parents have not been cleared. That is why we still discuss them as possible suspects. We owe it to Jonbenet to find her killer.

    We are an honest forum - not out to impress people like you with "equal sides". We just follow the evidence and people who want to continue to be BORG - - bent on Ramsey guilt regardless of the evidence - can go elsewhere. There are plenty of BORG sites.

    Lady Justice has balanced scales - i.e. equal sides. "Equal sides" = balance = justice. By her own words, jameson admits that she is not interested in presenting equal sides. There are case facts which you will not find at jameson's forum. Over the years she has consistently spun the evidence and suppressed those facts which are not exculpatory for the parents. Thinking people will realise that that is NOT an honest forum. You will not find the fact that the DNA might not be the killer's at jameson's. You will not find the fact that Fleet White's DNA (or others for that matter) didn't match at jameson's. jameson's policy of forbidding links to other sites has NOTHING to do with the BORG subsituting porn for the links (that just isn't going to happen with a forum anyway). It is because jameson does not want her readers to know the whole truth.
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  12. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Hornetsville, NY
    Posts
    8,871

    Default

    Jayelles, you are, bar none, the best jameson debunker on the forums. I often wanted to do what you are doing, but there just aren't enough hours in the day for me. That's why I appreciate so much you're exposing jameson's lies and spin with facts that cannot be disputed. Thanks.
    Keep me away from the wisdom which does not cry,
    the philosophy which does not laugh,
    and the greatness which does not bow before children.

    ---Kahlil Gibran---



Similar Threads

  1. Hat Tricks At Susan's Bennett's Forum
    By Cherokee in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: May 4, 2006, 10:33 am, Thu May 4 10:33:12 UTC 2006
  2. Susan Bennett
    By JC in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: August 10, 2004, 8:15 am, Tue Aug 10 8:15:27 UTC 2004
  3. Susan bennett aka jameson
    By Tricia in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: January 22, 2004, 12:34 pm, Thu Jan 22 12:34:20 UTC 2004
  4. Could it be? We all agree with Susan Bennett?
    By Tricia in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: November 26, 2003, 12:02 pm, Wed Nov 26 12:02:19 UTC 2003

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •