Page 8 of 22 FirstFirst ... 45678910111218 ... LastLast
Results 85 to 96 of 261
  1. #85

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koldkase View Post
    So right.

    But you know, now that I'm thinking about it, when I fold clothes with waistbands, I usually run my fingers along them, inside them, to pull them tight and fold.

    Did the maid ever fold those? Did she ever fold JB's underwear? Maybe she had DNA on her hands from the grocery cart or pumping gas...and then went and did laundry. Did Patsy ever do the laundry? Maybe she had DNA on her hands from shopping or painting classes or pageants or mall/school performances.
    Oh, wait. This is THE INTRUDER'S DNA. No reasonable explanations allowed. No questions about the evidence SO CONVENIENTLY showing up now....
    That wouldn't explain the matching DNA in her underwear. Sorry, don't mean to be a wet blanket, just trying to work through this.

  2. #86

    Default

    Just a "nothing" kind of comment:

    I printed out the letter to JR from ML. Exactly 2 1/2 pages long. Kinda reminded me of another letter in this case.

  3. #87
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    The "Beehive State" It's true. Look it up
    Posts
    5,176

    Default

    Can't take these idiot liars anymore. I am not watching the Morning Shows. Lin Wood's slimy face will be everwhere.

    I can't believe these so called "experts." WTF????

    Wendy Murphy and Michael Kane. Both spoke the truth tonight.

    We have to remind ourselves who put this letter out there.

    Lacy can't be trusted and we know there is more here than meets the eye. Maybe, just maybe, this once someone will reveal what a load of crap this is and tell us the whole truth behind this "new DNA."

    Has anyone thought about the fact that Patsy may have had this DNA on her hands? Or John? Or Burke? Depending on who you think did it.

    Please God, just this once, don't let the dark side have the last word. For the sake of JonBenet Ramsey, let the ENTIRE TRUTH BE TOLD.
    tgrif@xmission.com
    FFJ C/O Tricia Griffith
    6300 N Sage Wood Drive
    Suite H #214
    Park City UT
    84098




    I am unaware of anyone who's profited from exploiting the Ramsey murder over a longer period of time, with a greater disregard for the principles of accuracy and fairness, than the production team of Mills and Tracey.They truly do inhabit a different moral universe from real journalists. It's the difference between journalism and propaganda.
    Alan Prendergast,reporter for Westword

  4. #88
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    The murderer would certainly have handled the ransom note paper for longer than he would have handled the longjohns. The same DNA on the ransom note paper would be more compelling.

    However, there is one thing which I haven't seen anyone mention so far - is Mary Lacy now going to publicly clear everyone else whose DNA was tested in this case? Is she going to apologise to them too? The Ramseys aren't the only people who have been tried by media and Internet and they aren't the only people whose lives have been ruined through speculation of their possible involvement in this case. If she's going to afford this privilege to the Ramseys, she shouold do the decent thing and extend to all the others too.

    If this evidence really is SO compelling and conclusive then she should put her money where her mouth is and extend this to the others too.
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  5. #89
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brooklyn, New York
    Posts
    2,632

    Default

    Okay, so now once again, an uphill battle due to the total and utter incompetence of the Boulder District Attorney

    First, when the news hit, hubby said "okay, see you tomorrow, I know you are on your way to the computer". I said "I can't, I'm too upset, I give up!"

    I thought I would either barf or cry when this "breaking news" came on. I couldn't bear to watch even the talking heads shows

    I feel a little better this morning having realized that Tricia is back on the case and just want to say that any support that is needed, you can count on me.

    How unprofessional for Lacy to clear ANYBODY while a case is still unsolved. I can only hope that the next DA will publicly state that the Ramseys, nor anyone else can be cleared until the REAL killer is found.

    I don't understand how Lacy can get away with this professionally. Where are her superiors slapping her around for doing something so unprofessional, so publicly? I keep forgetting that this happens in another country.....BOULDER!!!

    I'm just sick about this latest publicity stunt by and for the Ramseys and their enablers!!!

    I can't even watch the television about this. I have to change the channel every time the newscasters say the "new" developments have cleared the Ramseys

    Mary Lacy should rot in hell right alongside Patsy while they wait for John!

    Excellent press release Tricia!!!!

    I have a headache

    I cannot believe the public is expected to ignore the total LACK OF INTRUDER EVIDENCE and the total EVIDENCE pointing to the Ramseys for a degraded piece of DNA that has likely NOTHING at all to do with the murder

    I have a headache
    I have a headache
    My head hurts

    MY HEART HURTS FOR A LITTLE GIRL WHO WILL NEVER SEE JUSTICE!!!!
    PATSY RAMSEY WROTE THE RANSOM NOTE
    SHE WOULDN'T DO THAT FOR AN INTRUDER.
    PLEASE READ CHEROKEE'S ANALYSIS

    http://66.98.176.96/~tricia/forums/s...ead.php?t=6404

  6. #90
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    If this DNA evidence is so strong and is undoubtedly the killer's, she needs to clear EVERYONE who has been discussed as a suspect and whose DNA has been tested. She needs to apologise to them too.

    There is no justice bering served if she only clears the Ramseys because their DNA doesn't match and apologising to them for having been the subject of media and Internet speculation for 10 years .... and allow others whose DNA also doesn't match to continue having their lives destroyed by the same kinds of discussions.

    Come on Mary - put your money where your mouth is. If you are so confident that this DNA belongs to the killer then publicly clear EVERYONE whose DNA doesn't match and apologise to them too for what THEY have also suffered. There are numerous people who have been endlessly discussed, maligned and libelled over the years who did NOT refuse police interviews and polygraphs.

    Do the decent thing.
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  7. #91
    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

    Post Nancy Grace Transcript

    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../09/ng.01.html

    NANCY GRACE, HOST: Breaking news tonight, bombshell in the case of 6- year-old beauty queen JonBenet Ramsey, found strangled, beaten to death, apparently the victim of a brutal sex assault all in the basement of her own Boulder, Colorado, home. Tonight, newly discovered DNA evidence emerges by use of a new and highly sensitive DNA procedure called touch DNA. Will it finally crack the murder case of 6-year-old Colorado beauty queen JonBenet Ramsey? A decade later, still no justice for JonBenet.
    (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Some newly discovered DNA evidence in the JonBenet Ramsey case has surfaced, and apparently, this DNA evidence does not match any of the Ramsey family members, including John Ramsey, Patsy Ramsey or any other immediate family members. You remember JonBenet`s body was found in their family home in Boulder, Colorado, back on December 26, the day after Christmas, in 1996. Since then, the family has been under fire and grilled for being possibly attached to the murder of their daughter.

    JOHN RAMSEY, FATHER: I did not kill my daughter, JonBenet.

    PATSY RAMSEY, MOTHER: I did not kill JonBenet. I did not have anything to do with it. I loved that child.

    JOHN RAMSEY: It`s hard for people to accept, I think, that someone could come into a home and hurt a child in the bed. And we were perhaps an answer.

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    GRACE: Good evening. I`m Nancy Grace. I want to thank you for being with us. Breaking news tonight in the brutal murder of 6-year-old Colorado beauty queen JonBenet Ramsey. In the last hours, Colorado authorities reveal newly discovered DNA evidence in the case attained through a new and highly sensitive DNA technique called touch DNA. Will it finally crack the case? Who murdered JonBenet?

    (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

    UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Breaking news out of Colorado. Newly discovered DNA evidence does not match any Ramsey family member. The Boulder DA has released a letter officially clearing the Ramsey family of any involvement in the December 1996 death of the 6-year-old. The DNA, from a male, did not match anyone in law enforcement DNA databases.

    JOHN RAMSEY: We now have pretty irrefutable DNA evidence, according to the DA`s office, and that`s the most significant thing to me. And certainly, we`re grateful that they acknowledged that we, you know, based on that, certainly could not have been involved. We now have very, very solid evidence, and that`s always been the hope, at least in the recent past, that that`s -- that will lead us to the killer eventually.

    UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The recent testing was done on a different area of the child`s clothing. JonBenet`s body was found in the basement of the family home in a little used room on the day after Christmas in 1996.

    PATSY RAMSEY: We`ve been said to be under the umbrella of suspicion, whatever that means, kind of in No Man`s Land.

    There is a killer on the loose. Keep your babies close to you! There`s someone out there!

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    GRACE: Straight out to Nia Bender, news director at 710 KNUS, joining us from Denver. Bring us up to date, Nia.

    NIA BENDER, 710 KNUS RADIO: Well, this was kind of a surprise for everybody. Mary Lacy, the district attorney in Boulder, sent out a press release a little earlier and announced that she went to a conference a few years ago basically concerning a new type of DNA on some educational training. That`s what she said in her press release. And then they contacted the company, Bode Technologies, in October of last year. And Bode though that they could help them out. They sent them some different pieces of clothing.

    And then on March 24th, surprise, surprise, they actually did come up with DNA on the side of some leggings or longjohns, depending on what you want to call them, that JonBenet had been wearing that also matched the DNA that was in her panties. So this changes the whole ball game, and it really, really, really, clears the Ramsey family.

    GRACE: We are taking your calls live. Joining us tonight is the lead scientist who worked with Bode Technology on the Ramsey case, Angela Williamson. Ms. Williamson, thank you for being with us. Explain to me touch DNA.

    ANGELA WILLIAMSON, BODE TECHNOLOGY: OK, Nancy. Touch DNA is left behind every time that you touch somebody. It`s essentially shed skin cells. If you touch somebody on the shoulder, you`re leaving behind DNA. However, it`s very hard to find this touch DNA. It`s invisible. We can`t see it. So the way we have to try and sample it is to have a good idea where a person may have been touched and where these shed skin cells may be.

    In this case, we knew that the suspect perhaps pulled down JonBenet`s longjohns. So we focused on the waistband and the side hip areas, where you would expect shed DNA to be left behind. We then used a careful sampling procedure, where we actually scraped a fine layer of this material to try and collect all the shed skin cells that may be on the top surface of her clothing.

    GRACE: What was found, apparently, were leftover DNA, found by this touch DNA technology on the sides of JonBenet`s little longjohns, where they would be pulled down or pulled up, usually when you`re dressing a child.

    Back to Angela Williamson with Bode Technology. She is the lead scientist who worked on the JonBenet Ramsey case employing this new technology, touch DNA. Can you get touch DNA off of human skin, or must it be on, for instance, a clothing surface?

    WILLIAMSON: Touch DNA is present wherever someone has touched something, someone, or an object. You could, technically, find it on human skin, however, you would get a lot of DNA from that own person, as well. So even though it`s possible, we typically look for touch DNA on objects or clothing.

    GRACE: Now, it`s my understanding touch DNA has been used around the world for four or five years. But to your knowledge, how long has it been used in the U.S.?

    WILLIAMSON: I think it`s about the same in the U.S., actually. I originally trained in Australia, and they`ve been using it for about five years. And pretty much anything that they do has come from the U.S. So it`s about five years routinely over here, as well.

    GRACE: I want to go to Larry Sutton, staff editor with "People" magazine. Larry, what`s your reaction?

    LARRY SUTTON, "PEOPLE": Well, it`s shock because this is a case that we thought was basically being swept under the rug, everything over and done with. The news today is very interesting. It reads as a whole bunch of new questions, such as, Well, who is the suspect, if you`re ruling out the family? And if by ruling out the family just because of the DNA, does that mean that you also believe they have no knowledge of anyone else coming into their home that day? That`s a pretty big deal.

    GRACE: To Wendy Murphy, former prosecutor and author of "And Justice for Some." Wendy, are you convinced that the discovery of this DNA, which matches DNA found in JonBenet`s underwear -- that DNA, a male DNA was found within blood of JonBenet Ramsey`s in her underwear. Does this really clear the Ramseys?

    WENDY MURPHY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: No. In my opinion, Mary Lacy has issues in terms of her judgments. She was the one who, after all, charged John Mark Karr, a completely innocent man, with the crime despite the fact that he had never even been in Boulder, Colorado. We all seemed to know that before she did. Let`s just say I`m not having a lot of faith in this woman`s judgment at all. Plus, she`s a lame duck politician. No.

    And you know what, Nancy? I can understand people get excited about the presence of DNA. It`s always important to talk about it. But you know something? There is no way that just because they might want to include some other unknown male that that by definition destroys the significance of the mountain of other evidence. And it is that very point that I think makes me crazy when I hear people say this proves that a stranger did it. You`d have to actually abandon the millions of pages of other evidence that points away from the stranger theory.

    GRACE: To you, Wendy Murphy. And shortly joining us will be the private investigators that actually worked for the Ramseys on the JonBenet Ramsey case. Wendy Murphy, when you refer to the mountain of evidence suggesting there was not an intruder that killed JonBenet Ramsey, to what are you referring?

    MURPHY: Well, first let me say it would take me a long time to go into all of it, Nancy. But you mentioned my book. I have an awful lot of stuff in there, more than one chapter with good, solid, based-in-fact information and evidence about the case that says nothing about an intruder.

    Most important evidence -- this child -- and the autopsy confirms this. It`s publicly available. This child had chronic vaginal trauma. Her hymen was nearly gone. Only a tiny piece of it remained. She both acute, meaning fresh, and chronic, meaning old, vaginal injuries. That to me doesn`t sound like some bogeyman showed up on the night in question. She had epithelial erosion in her genital area. Erosion -- Nancy, what does erosion mean? Wearing away over time.

    GRACE: Over time.

    MURPHY: Over time. Now, unless this man, this mystery man, had ongoing intimate access to the child, it really doesn`t make me feel better about the case at all.

    GRACE: And Wendy, what about that long ransom note apparently written, pages and pages of it -- written in the home, on Patsy Ramsey`s notepad with Patsy Ramsey`s pen, and a practice note? Whoever wrote the ransom note was not the least bit concerned of being discovered right there in the home!

    MURPHY: That`s exactly right. Now, somebody might say, Well, that doesn`t prove it was a family member. Maybe so, but it sure doesn`t sound like a stranger, either, now, does it?

    Now, here`s something I want to say to Mary Lacy. If you`re so confident that you have just pronounced the innocence of the Ramseys, then I hope you`ll be respectful of this child and the public`s right to know the truth and you will tomorrow release for public consumption all of the evidence that you gathered that implicated the Ramseys, that kept them under the umbrella of suspicion for so long.

    For example, there were three search warrants conducted for child pornography in the Ramsey home, on their computer, two homes, indeed. There was some material gathered. It is on file with the court. I don`t know what`s there. Please release it to the public so we can see. And how about the tests, if any, that were done on that pineapple?

    Can I take a moment here to explain this, Nancy? Probably the most important forensic evidence, far more important than this DNA, this child had undigested pineapple in her belly, which means she ate it within two hours of death. She died sometime after midnight. Parents said they brought her home from a party sound asleep and put her to bed sleeping. But aha, there was a bowl of pineapple on the kitchen table, Patsy`s fingerprints on the bowl. Both parents said, I didn`t give it to her.

    Now, mind you, I`m not so sure what`s bad about giving your child pineapple. French fries I understand. Pineapple, I don`t understand. But they were both adamant, I didn`t give it to her. We know that pineapple bowl was seized and tested, don`t we? At least, that`s what one would do if one found undigested pineapple in a dead child`s belly. So Mary Lacy, where are those test results? I think we have a right to know.

    GRACE: Joining us now, two very special guests from Colorado Springs, Colorado, Ollie Gray and John San Agustin, both private investigators that worked on the JonBenet Ramsey case. Gentlemen, thank you for being with us.

    To you, Ollie. Do you believe this bombshell evidence that we now know about, more DNA evidence pointing to an unknown male found on the longjohns JonBenet was wearing when she went to bed -- do you believe that exonerates the Ramsey family?

    OLLIE GRAY, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR: Nancy, I think that the DNA tells the story. Everybody makes a big thing of the DNA. Then I think we ought to take it and understand it. And in this particular case, it proves the same thing that we`ve known since February of 1997, that the Ramseys were not involved and did not match any DNA testing at that time. Whether that was old archaic and this is new and modern, the results are the same. It lists somebody as a potential killer. And I think all the physical evidence points to an intruder, not the family at home.

    GRACE: What about it, John San Augustin?

    JOHN SAN AGUSTIN, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR: Well, you know, in all due respect to your last speaker, I don`t think she ever had the opportunity to truly review all the evidence in this case. We have. And I can tell you that there is plenty of physical evidence that points to intruder. We have a stun gun that was used on this poor little girl`s face and on her back. She was strangled with a garrote. She was sexually assaulted. We know that there`s a piece of this paintbrush that was used in the garrote that was missing. We have foreign footwear impressions inside of the room where she was found.

    So how do we explain all this? And the reality is this, Nancy, is that we have good physical evidence. DNA evidence is good physical evidence. And if you read in this -- go ahead, I`m sorry.

    GRACE: John, you and Ollie were paid by whom?

    SAN AGUSTIN: Paid by whom? We weren`t paid by anybody. We`ve been on pro bono for the Ramsey family since 1999.

    GRACE: I`m sorry? I couldn`t hear you. Repeat?

    SAN AGUSTIN: We have been working pro bono on behalf of the family since 1999.

    GRACE: And when did you enter the case?

    SAN AGUSTIN: Well, we were initially called back in 1996 by Commander Eller (ph). We were brought in to initially look at this case. And then after that, shortly we were brought on by Alex Hunter`s staff to assist Lou Smith (ph) in the intruder theory.

    GRACE: So at no time...

    SAN AGUSTIN: ... where we were asked to review...

    GRACE: At no time were you employed by the Ramseys?

    SAN AGUSTIN: No, we were. We were working for them pro bono since 199 under Mr. Wood, Mr. Lin Wood.

    GRACE: Oh, I understand. So you were never paid for your work?

    SAN AGUSTIN: No, ma`am. We were working pro bono on behalf of the Ramsey family, you know? And the reason why Ollie and myself have been committed to this case is because of the physical evidence. You know, we have people out there writing books and giving commentary, but nobody has truly looked at the physical evidence in this case.

    GRACE: Let`s go to the lines. Peggy in Virginia. Hi, Peggy.

    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hi. I was wondering if any of the parents ever got -- like, with the pageant -- ever got checked.

    GRACE: I`m sorry. I couldn`t understand you. Repeat.

    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The parents, like, through the pageant and stuff?

    GRACE: Oh, I see, parents of people that attended those pageants. Back to Larry Sutton with "People" magazine. What do we know about that?

    SUTTON: Well, we know, of course they interviewed everyone and anyone who had anything to do with JonBenet Ramsey and her parents, so they`ve been interviewed in the past. The big question here now is, What do you do with that DNA, now that you`ve got it? What do you match it against? It`s not as common as, say, fingerprints would be. So I guess the work that`s cut out for the folks there in Colorado is to find out, you know, What are we going to match this up against, prior criminal records? We`ll have to wait and see.

    GRACE: So to Mike Brooks, former fed with the FBI. Mike, what do we do now, reopen the investigation? It`s the only answer.

    MIKE BROOKS, FORMER D.C. POLICE, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: It is, Nancy. It`s a cold case. But again, you`re going to have to go over all the physical evidence, all the statements (INAUDIBLE) to see if there`s any inconsistencies whatsoever, people who are close to the family. You know, criminal profilers for years have thought it was someone that either knew the family or was close to the family.

    (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

    JOHN RAMSEY: You know, the pain, the intense pain we felt was the loss of our child. We -- the accusations and the finger pointing wasn`t significant then. We were deeply crushed by the loss of our child, and particularly in the way -- the manner that it happened. I`d lost another daughter in an automobile accident. That was crushing, but it was different. It was an accident. This was not an accident. This was a willful act of another human being.

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

    (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

    PATSY RAMSEY: We feel like there are at least two people on the face of this earth that know who did it, and that is the killer and someone that that person may have confided in. And we need that one phone call. We need the one phone call to this number that will help the authorities come to a conclusion.

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    GRACE: Straight out to the lines. Tonight a bombshell. Due to a highly sensitive new DNA technique called touch DNA, we now learn of more DNA discovered on the leggings beauty queen JonBenet Ramsey wore the night she went to bed, the night that she was killed. That DNA, a male DNA, matches DNA found in her underwear.

    Straight back out to Angela Williamson, the lead scientist who worked with Bode Technology on the Ramsey case. Was the DNA sperm?

    WILLIAMSON: The DNA profile we obtained was not from spermatozoa.

    GRACE: That only leaves hair, skin, nails. Do we know what substance it was?

    WILLIAMSON: The area that we sampled from, there was no visible staining. We believe it to be touch DNA, most likely skin cells from maybe someone`s hand.

    GRACE: Skin cells, OK. Angela, Ms. Williamson, the DNA found inside the 6-year-old`s underwear, the inside crotch of her underwear, mingled with her blood -- was that DNA sperm?

    WILLIAMSON: We actually did not do that testing. It is my belief that it was not from sperm, though. However, that testing was done by the Denver PD.

    GRACE: Thank you. Back to Nia Bender with 710 KNUS. The DNA found in JonBenet`s underwear, was it sperm? Do we know what it was?

    BENDER: We do not know what was in the underwear. They have never really clarified whether there was sperm in the underwear or not.

    GRACE: OK, let`s ask Ollie Gray. Ollie, you and John San Agustin say that you have had inside information, that you`ve been able to review the files. Was the DNA in her underwear sperm?

    GRAY: As far as I know, it was not sperm.

    GRACE: What was it?

    GRAY: It was a liquid, and it could have been either from the mouth, or it could have been from an insertion into the vagina area of part of the paintbrush that caused the fluid. As you remember, it was also mixed with blood.

    (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

    (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Some newly discovered DNA evidence in the JonBenet Ramsey case has surfaced, and apparently, this DNA evidence does not match any of the Ramsey family members, including John Ramsey, Patsy Ramsey or any other immediate family members. You remember JonBenet`s body was found in their family home in Boulder, Colorado, back on December 26, the day after Christmas, in 1996. Since then, the family has been under fire and grilled for being possibly attached to the murder of their daughter.

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    GRACE: Welcome back. Bombshell evidence in the case of 6-year-old beauty queen JonBenet Ramsey. We learned in the last hours that the Colorado prosecutors have announced new DNA results, DNA results that they say exonerate the Ramsey family.

    Straight out to the calls. Maggie in California. Hi, Maggie.

    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hello.

    GRACE: Hi, dear. What`s your question?

    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My question is, is that it is my understanding they have a national database for DNA evidence, and if they had not compared that to that -- and child molesters seldom do it once.

    GRACE: Maggie, they have put the DNA into COTIS (ph), the national DNA data bank, and there has not been a match whatsoever. Isn`t that correct, Larry Sutton?

    SUTTON: Yes. And the reason for that, again, as we say, it`s still relatively new. I mean, it`s not brand-new, but if it were fingerprints, you`d have a lot more people to check it up against. DNA, not that many.

    (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

    (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

    UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Breaking news, JonBenet Ramsey`s family may finally feel vindicated. Almost 12 years after her murder, the district attorney in Boulder, Colorado, released new DNA evidence in the case clearing the family.

    DNA was taken from JonBenet`s leggings that go over her underwear and it does not match her -- match with mom, dad, or anyone in the immediate family.

    JonBenet`s body was found in her family`s home in Boulder, Colorado a day after Christmas, December 26th, 1996. That morning, her mom, Patsy Ramsey finds a ransom note at the bottom of the staircase. Several hours later, John Ramsey finds his 6-year-old daughter dead.

    STEVE THOMAS, FORMER BOULDER POLICE DETECTIVE: By the time I left the Boulder Police Department, June of 1998 -- Patsy, out of 73 suspects whose handwriting had been looked at, you were the only one that showed evidence to suggest authorship.

    These people know better than anybody. Probable cause was not the issue in this case.

    Patsy, you could have been arrested in this case.

    PATSY RAMSEY, MOTHER OF JONBENET RAMSEY: I wish I had been and then we would have had a free and fair trial, and you would have met your Waterloo, Mr. Thomas.

    JOHN MARK KARR, SUSPECT IN JONBENET MURDER CASE: I love JonBenet and she died accidentally.

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    (END VIDEOTAPE)

    GRACE: Straight out to the lawyers joining us tonight -- Wendy Murphy, Renee Rockwell, Peter Odom.

    To you, Renee Rockwell, will the fact that John Mark Karr was brought all the way back from Thailand to the U.S. presumably on child pornography charges, but was made a very highly visible suspect in the JonBenet Ramsey murder trial, will that make it more difficult to prosecute the real killer?

    RENEE ROCKWELL, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, Nancy, absolutely. Any defense attorney is going to say, look, you`re just doing the shotgun approach, you arrested him, you accused the mother, the father, you`ve accused family members. It just dilutes any possible suspect.

    GRACE: Peter Odom?

    PETER ODOM, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Absolutely. And you know, the best piece of evidence that they will have in the case, they just got. I would love to be defending the Ramseys in this case because there`s so much physical evidence clearing them and John Mark Karr is just one piece of it.

    GRACE: And to you, Wendy Murphy, what about it?

    WENDY MURPHY, FORMER PROSECUTOR, AUTHOR OF "AND JUSTICE FOR SOME": Look, I`m sure the mountain of evidence that we haven`t seen yet would be - - it would be good if we saw that before we answered that question.

    So much of this case is still under wraps. And let`s not forget the Ramseys were suspects in part because they lawyered up the day the child`s body was found and refused to go to the police station for interviews. That caused problems for them right away.

    And by the way, as we`re talking about underwear, please let me say this, when John Ramsey was finally interviewed about some of the evidence by law enforcement officials, they told him that sweater fibers matching his unusual Israeli wool sweater were also found in the crotch of the child`s underpants.

    So you want to talk about DNA of a mystery man, that`s fine. Let`s also talk about John Ramsey`s sweater fibers, shall we?

    GRACE: We are taking your calls live. To Tunisia in North Carolina, hi, Tunisia.

    TUNISIA, NORTH CAROLINA RESIDENT: Hi, Nancy. I love your show, I watch it every night.

    GRACE: Thank you.

    TUNISIA: My question was, how recent or how long after JonBenet`s death was this test taken? And was it taken off of her underwear or was it taken off of JonBenet?

    GRACE: Now are you talking about this most recent DNA?

    TUNISIA: This touch testing.

    GRACE: OK.

    Out to Angelo Williamson with Bode Technology -- she is the lead scientist who worked with the D.A. on the Ramsey case.

    Angela Williamson, the testing that you just did was on DNA that you discovered on the leggings she wore to bed that night, correct?

    ANGELA WILLIAMSON, BODE TECHNOLOGY, WORKED WITH DA ON JONBENET RAMSEY CASE: Yes, that is correct. And that was done early this year.

    GRACE: Out to the lines, to Marie in Kentucky, hi, Marie.

    MARIE, KENTUCKY RESIDENT: Hi, hi, Nancy. I love your show.

    GRACE: Hi, dear. Thank you. What`s your question?

    MARIE: Listen, I want to know, did they get DNA from John Mark Karr? And why -- how did he get exonerated?

    GRACE: To Nia Bender with 710 KNUS, want to explain?

    NIA BENDER, NEWS DIRECTOR, 710 KNUS RADIO: Yes, I`d be glad to. Yes, they did go ahead and take a DNA sample from John Mark Karr. His DNA did not match anything that they had found on JonBenet Ramsey`s clothing or on her body.

    And basically they had nothing that they could tie him together with this on other than the fact he had some pretty strange fantasies.

    GRACE: Out to the lines, let`s go to Carolyn in New Jersey. Hi, Carolyn.

    CAROLYN, NEW JERSEY RESIDENT: Hi, Nancy. My question is, why wasn`t the DNA that was found in JonBenet`s underwear years ago enough to exonerate her parents back then?

    GRACE: You know, that`s an excellent question.

    I want to go out to Mike Brooks on that. Since this DNA on the leggings and apparently the DNA was found on the long johns where they would be pulled up or pulled down on JonBenet Ramsey.

    MIKE BROOKS, FMR. DC POLICE DETECTIVE SERVED ON FBI TERRORISM TASK FORCE: Right.

    GRACE: Touch DNA from touching the leggings -- it was not sperm, a saliva, blood -- it was from touching the fiber. Very, very difficult to obtain.

    Now, if the DNA, the male DNA, found inside her underwear was not enough to exonerate the Ramseys, why now?

    BROOKS: I think because there was just such scrutiny around the Ramseys. You know they looked at Patsy, they looked at Miss -- John Ramsey, and they also looked at the brother, her brother Burke.

    You know, did not match any -- that`s a great question, Nancy. But you know what? Everybody`s always talking about -- let`s talk about the first six hours of this investigation.

    Wendy brings up a lot of good points and I have to agree with her on some of her points. But the Boulder Police Department botched this case in the first six hours. It was only a kidnapping for the first six hours. The police didn`t even find her body, Nancy until the -- in her own house for six hours.

    To me that`s despicable.

    GRACE: Let`s go out to Dr. Joshua Perper. He is the medical examiner and author joining us out of Miami, Florida.

    Dr. Perper, it`s wonderful to see you. Question: is the examination of JonBenet`s body now limited to that `96 autopsy?

    DR. JOSHUA PERPER, MEDICAL EXAMINER, AUTHOR OF "WHEN TO CALL THE DOCTOR": Well, my understanding is that they want to re-examine the body perhaps to do additional sampling of tissue from the vaginal area or other area. But I don`t think that they`ll find much by this time.

    GRACE: Why the.

    PERPER: . because they found already the foreign mysterious, stranger DNA.

    GRACE: And Dr. Perper, how accurate is DNA?

    PERPER: Well, it`s very -- it`s very precise, I would say, that they are testing, which sometimes exceed the possibility that somebody on earth did it, probably it exceeds certain 90 percent.

    GRACE: Now I want to go back out to Wendy Murphy, former prosecutor and author of "And Justice for Some."

    Wendy, it`s a really good point. If the Ramseys were not exonerated when DNA was found inside JonBenet`s underwear, why now?

    MURPHY: Look, I think that`s a perfectly brilliant question. And I think Mary Lacy has to answer that. But I`ll tell you one thing about the DNA that was inside the underpants.

    My understanding -- I could be wrong about this -- but I believe Henry Lee even had something to do with the testing in the sense he looked at other pairs of underpants and said, you know, in the manufacturing process this was such a teensy, wincey, itsy fragmented little tiny bit of DNA that he thought it was a whole lot of nothing probably from the manufacturing because he found other male DNA in underpants that had just come fresh out of a package.

    So I don`t think it exonerated anybody. I think it was a red herring, a whole lot of nothing, and that`s why it didn`t clear them.

    Frankly, I think this new evidence doesn`t necessarily do much either because whether or not a person touched those long johns, it doesn`t prove anything about whether that person or any other person killed the child.

    Touching long johns can raise a host of questions about how, when, where, the touching occurred. It could have been a week later. I mean -- sorry, a week earlier, a month earlier, you don`t know when the DNA was placed there. And I think everybody would agree, there is no way to know when that touch happened.

    GRACE: But, Mike Brooks, we`ve got to acknowledge that the likelihood of an innocent touching on the long johns she wore to bed and the same DNA being inside of her underwear is pretty astronomical.

    BROOKS: Absolutely, I mean, did it come to the same manufacturer or was it the same that folded them up and put them in the plastic bag? Probably not, Nancy. You know, but -- you know, is it a stranger? Is this someone that the Ramseys know? We still don`t know and we`re still not any closer with this DNA testing.

    GRACE: Back out to John San Agustin, private investigator who worked on the JonBenet Ramsey case. He`s joining us along with Ollie Gray.

    John, JonBenet Ramsey was sexually assaulted, that was clear. But what would be the explanation for the fact that she had been sexually assaulted, apparently, in the past. She had little or no hymen left whatsoever.

    JOHN SAN AGUSTIN, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR, WORKED ON JONBENET RAMSEY CASE: You know I don`t know where that information came up because when we reviewed 10 years` worth of history.

    GRACE: I think it was in the autopsy report.

    SAN AGUSTIN: I`m not aware of that. What I`m aware of in the autopsy report is that there was reddish hyperemia. Why you have blood in that poor little girl`s underwear is because somebody had sexually assaulted her causing that blood to come on to her underwear.

    The fact that we have the DNA there and on her long johns is significant. That is big. It is great physical evidence, and anybody who`s investigating a homicide would consider that great evidence.

    (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

    (NEWSBREAK)

    (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

    KARR: It`s not so much that I`m concerned that they`re exploiting her, it`s just I want them to get their bloody hands off her is what I want. If I saw anything on the Internet about her, I would die. It would just be disgusting.

    Who are those disgusting strangers who would dare talk about her?

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    GRACE: Well, you mean other than you, John Mark Karr? Weren`t you the one that said on tape that you wanted to crawl into her coffin and make love to her? A 6-year-old little girl from Colorado?

    We are taking your calls live.

    A bomb shell twists and turn in the JonBenet Ramsey murder investigation. Now DNA on the leggings the little girl wore to bed that night matches male DNA found inside her underwear.

    Apparently, Mary Lacy, the district attorney, believes that`s enough to clear and exonerate the Ramsey family.

    Out to the lines, let`s go to Karen in Kentucky. Hi, Karen.

    KAREN, KENTUCKY RESIDENT: Hi, Nancy.

    GRACE: What`s your question, dear?

    KAREN: Yes. Could you ask them, did they take a DNA testing from Burke? Or any of Burke`s friends?

    GRACE: Yes, it`s my understanding.

    Larry Sutton of "People" magazine, that everybody in the family was tested.

    LARRY SUTTON, STAFF EDITOR, PEOPLE MAGAZINE: Absolutely, everyone was tested. The police did their due diligence there.

    GRACE: Back out to Wendy Murphy, former prosecutor and author.

    Wendy, the evidence we were discussing earlier regarding the erosion of JonBenet Ramsey`s hymen and the evidence of repeated, over time, molestation, where did that come from?

    MURPHY: This is a direct quote from the autopsy. And I sure do hope that the other guests who claim to have examined all of the important evidence in this case can resurrect it so that they`ll know what we all know.

    Chronic inflammation is seen in the vagina mucosa, epithelial erosion, and as I mentioned, an eroded hymen.

    Nancy, those are very important words to anybody and I think Dr. Perper can even get to answer some of these questions about what does that mean. To some of us who`ve done these kinds of cases, it`s very clear, to a layperson not so much. The word erosion, the word chronic -- those are terms of art in medicine that mean over time.

    GRACE: You know what, Wendy? They certainly are.

    Dr. Perper, weigh in, explain what they mean.

    PERPER: Well, an abrasion means a scratch and chronic means long standing, so it means that those scratches were there for a significant period of time over and over if they are, indeed, chronic manifestation of physical injury.

    GRACE: To John San Agustin, private investigator who worked on the case, you just told me that was not in the autopsy report. It is.

    SAN AGUSTIN: No, I did not. I did not say that. I say I`m not aware. That was a comment. I said what I know of the autopsy is that we have reddish hyperemia, an abrasion to the distal part of her vaginal wall.

    And all I`m trying to look at here is to say, look, this little girl has blood in her underwear that is a mixture of this bandit, this criminal that her blood and his blood is -- there`s a mixture.

    GRACE: OK.

    SAN AGUSTIN: . in there and now we`ve got blood on the long johns.

    GRACE: I was asking you about the chronic vaginal trauma, the fact that she had very little hymen left, incidents that happened before the night of her murder. Whatever happened before the night of her murder, we may never know.

    What we do know is that when she put the leggings on, she went to bed, and on those leggings, around the waistband there is male DNA that matches the DNA inside the underwear.

    Now over a decade later, the district attorney believes that is enough evidence sufficient to exonerate the Ramsey family.

    Out to Shirley in Georgia, hi, Shirley.

    SHIRLEY, GEORGIA RESIDENT: Hi, Nancy, thank you for being the voice for the victims.

    GRACE: Thank you.

    SHIRLEY: I would like to ask, does anyone know if the Ramseys did their own laundry or if they sent their laundry out.

    GRACE: Now that`s an excellent question.

    Nia Bender, that could -- I know it`s a problematic theory but that could explain how the DNA ended up in her clothing.

    BENDER: It very well could. And, you know, I really can`t honestly tell you whether they sent their laundry out or not. But it does bring up the point that if there were sweater fibers found in JonBenet`s underwear that matched her father`s sweater, then, you know, how many times have you thrown your clothes in the drier, Nancy, with the kid`s clothes?

    GRACE: I very rarely would throw a sweater into a washer or drier.

    BENDER: It could have -- things could have been folded, though, and put with those.

    GRACE: True. True. That`s true.

    BENDER: So that may explain how fibers got there.

    GRACE: Out to Ollie Gray, the private investigator who worked on the case. Did they take their laundry out?

    OLLIE GRAY, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR WORKED ON JONBENET RAMSEY CASE: I don`t know. They had a lady that worked in their house. I doubt very seriously that they did.

    GRACE: I agree. To Sheeba in Illinois, hi, Sheeba.

    SHEEBA, ILLINOIS RESIDENT: Hey, sweet heart. My question is this touch DNA. It sounds like to me there could be some innocent people sent to prison because -- my example is, you and I don`t know each other, but supposing we did and on the streets you touched my shoulder and two hours later somebody stabs me and their blood didn`t get mixed in.

    GRACE: Well, Sheeba, let me tell you something. If the same DNA was found in your underwear, you might have a -- then there`d be a case. But simple touch DNA on the outside of the body is not enough for a conviction. But I understand your theory.

    Out to the lawyers -- to Renee Rockwell, is there any way, now that they`ve been exonerated, that, for instance, a lawsuit can be filed on behalf of Patsy Ramsey?

    ROCKWELL: I wouldn`t think so, Nancy, because I think that the police officers did act in good faith.

    GRACE: Peter?

    ODOM: I think that this letter from the D.A. has any legal effect and will prevent anyone from doing anything legal, Nancy.

    GRACE: Wendy?

    MURPHY: I agree with that completely.

    Nancy, I wish I could just clarify. John Ramsey was asked if he could explain away those sweater fibers and aside from stammering, he basically acknowledged it had never gone into the laundry because, as you pointed out, it was a wool sweater.

    And the underpants we`re talking about were from a brand new package, hasn`t ever been laundered.

    GRACE: Joining us tonight, Lisa Boesky, psychologist and author of "When to Worry."

    Lisa, weigh in.

    LISA BOESKY, PSYCHOLOGIST, AUTHOR OF "WHEN TO WORRY": Well, we ought to remember, this is not a typical 6-year-old that we see in a sandbox. This is a 6-year-old who`s been paraded around on the Internet, in pageants, very sexualized, and with her makeup and her hair.

    So you`ve got to remember how many creeps have been watching her and the -- predators that I know that have assaulted little girls like this, they tend to not want to cause pain to their victims and they certainly don`t want to kill them.

    They want to go back to them again and again and again for pleasure. So nothing about this makes sense and it still seems to me like it may be someone who knows the family.

    END
    "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."

  8. #92
    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 RiverRat View Post
    Hey River,

    Boulder DA Mary Lacy has vindicated John and Patsy Ramsey in the murder case of their daughter, JonBenet, due to what she calls new DNA evidence in the case.

    But Dan, Craig and Peter think differently. Their concensus: 'It's crap!'

    Click here to listen to their discussion. http://www.khow.com/cc-common/mainhe...rticle=3747424

    KHOW.com Webmaster,
    Matthew Quane
    Reminder.......
    "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."

  9. #93
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    Good Grief - the utterly incompetent San Augustin is still trying to make out that they worked on the official case! They claim to have reviewed all the "evidence":-

    JOHN SAN AGUSTIN, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR: Well, you know, in all due respect to your last speaker, I don`t think she ever had the opportunity to truly review all the evidence in this case. We have. And I can tell you that there is plenty of physical evidence that points to intruder. We have a stun gun that was used on this poor little girl`s face and on her back. She was strangled with a garrote. She was sexually assaulted. We know that there`s a piece of this paintbrush that was used in the garrote that was missing. We have foreign footwear impressions inside of the room where she was found.
    Is he saying he's seen the police files?

    Don't forget folks that these are the two PIs who identified J S GIgax as JonBenet's killer, claimed he'd "disappeared" and that it was a matter of some urgency to find him. This was despite the FACT that he hadn't disappeared at all and had an active web site with accurate contact details on it!

    Did I say Good Grief???
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  10. #94

    Default

    Thanks for transcript, Rat. At least Wendy Murphy was a voice for sanity and real evidence in the Ramsey case.

    I feel like I'm living in a parallel universe where the crazies run the show and the truth doesn't mean a thing.

    I want to see the alleged DNA evidence, all the alleles, what few of them they have. I want to see ALL the evidence, the police files, everything. This case is over. It will never be prosecuted. Lacy's John Mark Karr fiasco, and now her love letter to the Ramseys, has guaranteed that. Let's open up those vaults, Lacy. Let's exonerate every one who has come under suspicion. Or is that a privilege only reserved for your friends?

  11. #95
    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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
    Lest anyone should forget....WE at FFJ speak now and have always spoken for Jon Benet and will continue to be her advocates for as long as it takes to convict the perpetrator/perpetrators of her murder....

    You and I and our loyal forum speak for Jon Benet...I stand firmly in the belief that her murderer/murderers will some day be brought to justice....I know that is the reason that all of our loyal members are still here today after all of these long years...

    Voyager
    Beautifully said.....
    "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. #96
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    Call me crazy, but I have hopes this morning that Lacy's letter will have the exact OPPOSITE effect she wanted it to have....That many more people with brains in their heads will take a closer look at the particulars of this case, and start examining the evidence, asking questions, thinking. Perhaps the next DA really will take another look. Perhaps someone else will step forward and bring the case to another point.

    Then again, it IS Boulder, after all, and Boulderites just might want to let sleeping beauty queens lie...

    The Law of Unintended Consequences should bite Mary Lacy square on her ample behind.

    Where is Michael Tracey in all this hoo-hah? Has anyone dragged him from his barstool at the Hungry Toad so he can comment?

    Oh, one more thing...Didja notice how JR said "Certainly,...certainly" twice in the same sentence? He's trying to emphasize the certainty of this evidence, which of course his own psyche knows is not true, thus the repetition of definite words.
    "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!



Similar Threads

  1. Ramseys said "no anger" towards JBR's killer; JAR said killer deserved "forgiveness"
    By Cherokee in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: October 25, 2013, 8:16 pm, Fri Oct 25 20:16:54 UTC 2013
  2. October 2, 2010 - UPDATE - Burke has not been "officially" interviewed by police
    By Cherokee in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: October 4, 2010, 6:34 pm, Mon Oct 4 18:34:58 UTC 2010
  3. Denver Post, July 11, 2008 - "Anger won't clear Ramseys"
    By Little in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: July 13, 2008, 10:58 pm, Sun Jul 13 22:58:05 UTC 2008
  4. "DNA Clears Parents"
    By BobC in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: January 25, 2005, 8:54 am, Tue Jan 25 8:54:16 UTC 2005
  5. The Ramseys and "lynchings" and "lynch mobs"
    By JustinCase in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: June 20, 2004, 1:25 pm, Sun Jun 20 13:25:02 UTC 2004

Posting Permissions

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