Page 1 of 22 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 261
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    752

    Default Lacy officially "clears" Ramseys

    Well, this is an interesting development.

    http://www.9news.com/news/article.as...5421&catid=339

    Lacy has officially cleared the Ramseys of involvement in JonBenet's murder, based apparently solely on a new finding of DNA consistent with that in the underwear, said DNA having been found on the waistband of the long johns she was wearing over the underwear.

    Discuss.

  2. #2

    Default Dr. Boden

    On Fox News, Dr. Baden just said that if the DNA was on the clothing, it could have come from many difference sources. He also said that there were so many false alarms from the D.A.'S office, that he would not think this is conclusive evidence. (paraphrasing)

    GL

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Hornetsville, NY
    Posts
    8,871

    Default

    Oh sure, just like that, I'm going to accept Lacy's word without questioning anything - for instance, where were these items of clothing stored all these years? Was the underwear stored with the long johns?

    I don't trust Mary Lacy, and I want to know who has had access to JBR's clothing for the past 12 years. What is the chain of custody since Lacy conveniently put the case to bed?

    One more question. Since Lacy will soon be out of office, how soon afterwards can we expect unholy matrimony between John and Mary?

    IOW, BS.
    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---

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Hornetsville, NY
    Posts
    8,871

    Default

    Oh, and by the way, I also want to know the details on the DNA. Since they tried to pass the so-called fingernail DNA off as "matching" the underwear DNA, when there were only 2 or 3 clear markers in the fingernail DNA, how many markers did they find on the long john DNA that "matched" the incomplete panty DNA?

    Sorry, I'm just so sick of those blanks thinking we're all stupid. Baden's right.
    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---

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    In a World With Too Much Crime
    Posts
    7,608

    Default

    This is so stupid, but so typical of Lacy...one last act of defiance before she leaves office. Personally I don't think she can find her butt with both hands, much less solve or prosecute a case...so her "clearing" anyone doesn't mean anything!
    It's probably too late to get justice for JonBenét. Maybe it always was. But knowing where things went wrong is the first step to not going there again. **-- Alan Prendergast-Dec 21, 2006--**

    ______________________
    Bring all our Missing Home www.usearchut.org
    Prayers for our military who are protecting our freedom.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    752

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greenleaf View Post
    On Fox News, Dr. Boden just said that if the DNA was on the clothing, it could have come from many difference sources. He also said that there were so many false alarms from the D.A.'S office, that he would not think this is conclusive evidence. (paraphrasing)

    GL
    I just posted on the KUSA comments section something to that effect. The underwear touched the longjohns. Touch DNA analysis is sensitive enough at this time to pick up a transference between those two items. But if the Boulder investigation is going to be all DNA-gung-ho about the case now, then show me that the same DNA is on the ligature, paintbrush handle, tape, rope in John Andrew's room, the white blanket, JonBenet's shirt, the flashlight, the baseball bat, the broken glass pane, the spoon, and the bowl, and maybe we have something to chew on.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    752

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Watching You View Post
    Oh, and by the way, I also want to know the details on the DNA. Since they tried to pass the so-called fingernail DNA off as "matching" the underwear DNA, when there were only 2 or 3 clear markers in the fingernail DNA, how many markers did they find on the long john DNA that "matched" the incomplete panty DNA?

    Sorry, I'm just so sick of those blanks thinking we're all stupid. Baden's right.
    Oh, hey, yeah, notice that -- Lacy does not cite the new "touch" DNA as matching in any way that under the nails. So we can consider as official evidence that the DNA under the nails does not for purposes of a criminal trial "match" that of the underwear.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    4,284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Why_Nut View Post
    Well, this is an interesting development.

    http://www.9news.com/news/article.as...5421&catid=339

    Lacy has officially cleared the Ramseys of involvement in JonBenet's murder, based apparently solely on a new finding of DNA consistent with that in the underwear, said DNA having been found on the waistband of the long johns she was wearing over the underwear.

    Discuss.
    Discuss or disgust?

    Mary Lacy was determined to clear the Ramseys before she left office, with or without an intruder. When JMK didn't work out, she had to find another way.

    Touch DNA on the longjohns means nothing because it could have been contact transfer from the panties, especially since the longjohns were tight fitting and would have needed to be pulled up over the too-big panties.

    Have they tested the DNA of the male lab techs who undressed JonBenet or took the DNA samples? How about Boulder Coroner John Meyer who did the autopsy? Lab contamination is a big problem that was recently highlighted in a book exposing the problems even within the FBI.

    And then we have Mary Lacy's own word's which are in my signature. She stated the panty DNA could be an artifact and not related to the crime. Why is it suddenly good enough to clear the Ramseys?
    As soon as the ransom note was matched to Patsy's handwriting and linguistics, the Ramseys distanced themselves from it and have refused to talk about it since! The ransom note is the one verifiable link to JonBenet's killer, and the Ramseys want nothing to do with it! Why? The answer is obvious!

    RANSOM NOTE ANALYSIS: http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6404

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Watching You View Post
    Oh sure, just like that, I'm going to accept Lacy's word without questioning anything - for instance, where were these items of clothing stored all these years? Was the underwear stored with the long johns?

    I don't trust Mary Lacy, and I want to know who has had access to JBR's clothing for the past 12 years. What is the chain of custody since Lacy conveniently put the case to bed?

    One more question. Since Lacy will soon be out of office, how soon afterwards can we expect unholy matrimony between John and Mary?

    IOW, BS.
    Lacy seems to have learned nothing from the Karr fiasco. Here she is, jumping the gun again in her eagerness to exonerate the Ramseys, shutting her eyes as usual to the rest of the evidence strongly implicating the Ramseys.
    So some 'touch DNA' matching those of the panties was found on the leggings? For example, the stager of the scene who handled both the underwear and the leggings could have transferred it imo.
    Lab contamination is also a possibility. This has happened even in renowned DNA testing labs (like e.g.in the Penny Scaggs case).

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    378

    Default

    This is HOGWASH!

    Regardless, it appears to be the end of it.

    The Ramseys - may they rot in hell - pulled it off.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tril View Post
    This is HOGWASH!

    Regardless, it appears to be the end of it.

    The Ramseys - may they rot in hell - pulled it off.
    They can say whaterever they want this is not over. Dr.Baden says this proves nothing. Let Lacy have her next screw up and throughly embarass Boulder again. This really stinks!! It does nothing to clear anyone. This was a parting gift from Lacy to Ramseys

  12. #12
    RiverRat's Avatar
    RiverRat is offline FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Left is Patsy Ramsey)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    NoneYa Beessness
    Posts
    7,771

    Thumbs down

    What a lovely Parting Gift from Lacy! I am not surprised at all though, kind of expected something just like this from the Thug-Hugging Prosecutor before she snuck out the backdoor.

    Will John "frame" this letter too?!
    "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

Posting Permissions

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