Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 25 to 36 of 74
  1. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Texan
    Maybe it is a typo but in your post # 11 I believe you wrote that the judge said all 6 concluded MR Ramsey didn't write the note instead of MRS Ramsey.
    Thanks so much for pointing this out, Texan - my mistake. The previous discussion on another forum had focused so much on Patsy that I obviously read MRS Ramsey instead of MR Ramsey.

    Here is the whole text:

    http://www.acandyrose.com/03312003carnes21-30.htm

    (Page 21/ 22)

    During the investigation, the Boulder Police Department and Boulder County District Attorney's Office consulted at least six handwriting experts. (SMF 1 191; PSMF 1 191.) All of these experts consulted the original Ransom Note and original handwriting exemplars from Mrs. Ramsey. (SMF 205; PSMF , 205.) Four of these experts were hired by the police and two were hired by defendants. (SMF , 191; PSMF , 191.) All six experts agreed that Mr. Ramsey could be eliminated as the author of the Ransom Note. (SMF 194; PSMF 194.) None of the six consulted experts identified Mrs. Ramsey as the author of the Ransom Note. (SMF 195; PSMF 195.) Rather, the experts' consensus was that she "probably did not" write the Ransom Note. (SMF , 196; PSMF 196.)14 On a scale of one to five, with five being elimination as
    the author of the Ransom Note, the experts placed Mrs. Ramsey at a 4.5 or a 4.0. (SMF 203; PSMF 203.) The experts described the chance of Mrs. Ramsey being the author of the Ransom Note as "very low." (SMF . 204; PSMF 1 204.) The two experts hired by defendants both assert that this evidence strongly suggests that Mrs. Ramsey did not write the Note. (SMF 254.) [/B]

    [Footnote]:
    14 Chet Ubowski of the Colorado Bureau of Investigation concluded that the evidence fell short of that needed to support a conclusion that Mrs. Ramsey wrote the note. (SMF 197; PSMF , 197.) Leonard Speckin, a private forensic document examiner, concluded that differences between the writing of Mrs. Ramsey's handwriting and the author of the Ransom Note prevented him from identifying Mrs. Ramsey as the author of the Ransom Note, but he was unable to eliminate her. (SMF 198; PSMF 198.) Edwin Alford, a private forensic document examiner, states the evidence fell short of that needed to support a conclusion that Mrs. Ramsey wrote the note. (SMF 197; PSMF 197.) Richard Dusick of the U.S. Secret Service concluded that there was "no evidence to indicate that Patsy Ramsey executed any of the questioned material appearing on the [R]ansom [N]ote." (SMF 200; PSMF 200.) Lloyd Cunningham, a private forensic document examiner hired by defendants, concluded that there were no significant similar individual characteristics shared by the handwriting of Mrs. Ramsey and the author of the Ransom Note, but there were many significant differences between the handwritings. (SMF' 201; PSMF , 201.) Finally, Howard Rile concluded that Mrs. Ramsey was between "probably not" and "elimination," on a scale of whether she wrote the Ransom Note. (SMF 202; PSMF 202.)

    Rather, the experts' consensus was that she "probably did not" write the Ransom Note. (SMF , 196; PSMF 196.)

    On a scale of one to five, with five being elimination as
    the author of the Ransom Note, the experts placed Mrs. Ramsey at a 4.5 or a 4.0. (SMF 203; PSMF 203.)
    But it was NOT the experts' consensus that she "probably did not" write the note.
    And that alleged 1 to 5 scale was probably "info" Carnes got from Team Ramsey only.

  2. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rashomon
    But it was NOT the experts' consensus that she "probably did not" write the note.

    And that alleged 1 to 5 scale was probably "info" Carnes got from Team Ramsey only.
    Carnes didn't PROBABLY get the bogus info from Team Ramsey, she DEFINITELY got it from Team Ramsey. Carnes had no other input from anyone other than Lin Wood and the Ramseys because Darnay Hoffman didn't bother to show up. He defaulted on his court appearance, so the only documents submitted to Carnes were from the Ramsey side.

    IDIs and RSTs who post and re-post Carnes' "decision" all over the internet as if it were Holy Writ fail to mention that little detail. Carnes received NOTHING from anyone about the case other than what Lin Wood and the Ramseys wanted her to see.

    I repeat. Darnay Hoffman didn't show up, so Team Ramsey spoon-fed their side of the case to Judge Carnes, and she was foolish enough to issue a decision based on documents from only one party in the lawsuit. I hold Darnay Hoffman personably responsible for handing Team Ramsey ammunition that was then construed by Mary Lacey to give justification to her concerted efforts to exhonerate the Ramseys instead of truly investigate the facts and evidence.

    I guarantee Mary Lacy has never read the full documented history of the Ramsey case. She only knows what Lou Smit has told her. Once Lin Wood waved the Carnes decision in Lacy's face, she became best buds with the Ramseys and quit all pretense of impartiality. Lacy is lazy. She hasn't done her research in the case. And that's what Lin Wood and the Ramseys have counted on from Day One. Their supporters are those who refuse to look at the evidence, but based their loyalty on the feeling that "the parents could not have done this." Time and again, it comes down to that fact. Evidence vs. emotion. No amount of the former will change the mind of one who does not want to believe parents are capable of covering up the truth in order to save someone in the family.

  3. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    1,311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cherokee

    I guarantee Mary Lacy has never read the full documented history of the Ramsey case. She only knows what Lou Smit has told her. Once Lin Wood waved the Carnes decision in Lacy's face, she became best buds with the Ramseys and quit all pretense of impartiality. Lacy is lazy. She hasn't done her research in the case. And that's what Lin Wood and the Ramseys have counted on from Day One. Their supporters are those who refuse to look at the evidence, but based their loyalty on the feeling that "the parents could not have done this." Time and again, it comes down to that fact. Evidence vs. emotion. No amount of the former will change the mind of one who does not want to believe parents are capable of covering up the truth in order to save someone in the family.
    Profoundly true. And profoundly sad.
    That being said, both Lacy and Carnes KNOW there were a lot of falsehoods being fed to them. They know there is more to KNOW! Yet they choose not to know, because they are 1. lazy 2. too intimidated by the R lawyers even after 11 years. or 3. Both.
    This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  4. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee
    Profoundly true. And profoundly sad.
    That being said, both Lacy and Carnes KNOW there were a lot of falsehoods being fed to them. They know there is more to KNOW! Yet they choose not to know, because they are 1. lazy 2. too intimidated by the R lawyers even after 11 years. or 3. Both.
    And 4. ashamed to admit what utter failures in their job they both are, having behaved in such an foolishly unprofessional way.

    A judge basing her decision only on what one party in the lawsuit told her, and a DA only too eager to accept those blatant falsehoods at face value.
    Carnes and Lacy are two more who have their place in the Ramsey case "Hall of Shame" - right up there with Lou Smit, Hunter and others who have sunken the ship of the investigation.

  5. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Well said, Cherokee. btw I like "Lazy" Lacy much better than Stacey Lacy, which we often hear. It really depicts her very well, doesn't it?
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  6. #30

    Default

    The Carnes' opinion was a gift to the Boulder DA's Office. That opinion was NOTHING MORE than an opinion, BASED ON DEPOSITION TESTIMONY NEVER TESTED IN A TRIAL, but simply arrived at by Carnes using the civil law standards under DISCOVERY in a CIVIL LAW SUIT. That Lacy grabbed hold of it and endorsed it PUBLICLY said all we need to know about her ETHICS. Add in the PERV Karr arrest, and it's crystal clear that Lazy Lacy is only too happy to continue ignorant and irresponsible in her office as the prosecutor for the People.

    Again, JonBenet was thrown to the dogs.

    "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.

  7. #31

    Default

    Well, now that is a contradictory statement if I have EVER read one. How in the world can he believe that Dusick is a qualified document examiner, if he doesn't know how much actual handwriting work he does. That makes NO sense.
    Does to me. Just because he may have passed the exam x number of years ago doesn't mean he's kept up his study. I mean, it's like a doctor: he may have a medical degree, but if all he does is fill prescriptions, would you trust him to perform your knee surgery?
    They should all drown in lakes of blood. Now they will know why they are afraid of the dark. Now they will learn why they fear the night.

  8. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Punisher
    Does to me. Just because he may have passed the exam x number of years ago doesn't mean he's kept up his study. I mean, it's like a doctor: he may have a medical degree, but if all he does is fill prescriptions, would you trust him to perform your knee surgery?
    Right..so he would HARDLY be "qualified" would he?

    NOPE

  9. #33
    RiverRat's Avatar
    RiverRat is offline FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Left is Patsy Ramsey)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    NoneYa Beessness
    Posts
    7,824

    Cool

    Does anyone have a copy of the "Q's" handy from the RN and Patsy's examples?! I promise to save it this time!!!
    "Don't play dumb with me, RR! You're no good at it." The Punisher

    "Although no one is anticipating a prompt resolution to this long and much-detoured case, perhaps - just perhaps - might we see one of those moments “when a chance arrow of history scores a perfect bullseye on a deserving target”? Steve Thomas 2009

    "Justice hasn't had a chance so far. Anyone who doesn't have this as their prime goal, we'll have a falling out with." Fleet White - Time Magazine

    "What happens is that evil comes in," Fleet says. "If you don't have truth, all you have are lies, then what comes in is evil. And evil just does its thing. In the Ramsey case, it just did its thing, and it's eaten up so many people."

  10. #34

    Default

    Here you are, darlin'.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  11. #35
    RiverRat's Avatar
    RiverRat is offline FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Left is Patsy Ramsey)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    NoneYa Beessness
    Posts
    7,824

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by Cherokee
    Here you are, darlin'.
    I soooooooo love you, sweetie! And those Q's!
    "Don't play dumb with me, RR! You're no good at it." The Punisher

    "Although no one is anticipating a prompt resolution to this long and much-detoured case, perhaps - just perhaps - might we see one of those moments “when a chance arrow of history scores a perfect bullseye on a deserving target”? Steve Thomas 2009

    "Justice hasn't had a chance so far. Anyone who doesn't have this as their prime goal, we'll have a falling out with." Fleet White - Time Magazine

    "What happens is that evil comes in," Fleet says. "If you don't have truth, all you have are lies, then what comes in is evil. And evil just does its thing. In the Ramsey case, it just did its thing, and it's eaten up so many people."

  12. #36

    Default Thanks for posting those q's.

    Thanks for posting those q's, I have been looking for them too.



Similar Threads

  1. Fact or Fiction?
    By Barbara in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: January 1, 2005, 6:07 pm, Sat Jan 1 18:07:08 UTC 2005

Posting Permissions

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