![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
HI-TEC BOOT PRINT AND UNIDENTIFIED PALM PRINT From Judge Carnes’ Decision: “Plaintiff, of course, argues that any evidence suggesting an intruder was staged by defendants. Even assuming that all the above evidence could have been staged, however, defendants point to other evidence for which a theory of contrivance by them seems either impossible or highly implausible. First, defendants note the existence of several recently-made unidentified shoeprints containing a "HI-TEC" brand mark were found in the basement imprinted in mold growing on the basement floor. (SMF 151-152; PSMF 151-152.) Defendants do not own any "HI-TEC" brand shoes and none of their shoes match the shoeprint marks. (SMF 153; PSMF 153.) Likewise, another similar partial shoeprint was found near where JonBenet's body was found. (SMF 155; PSMF 155.) The owner of the "HI-TEC" shoe that made the footprints at the murder scene has never been identified. (SMF 154, 155; PSMF 154, 155 n addition, on the wine-cellar door, there is a palm print that does not match either of defendants' palm prints. (SMF 156; PSMF 156.) The individual to whom it belongs has never been identified. (SMF 156; PSMF 156.) Of course, the existence of these shoeprints and palm print is not dispositive, as they could have been made prior to the time of the murder, but they are clearly consistent with an argument that an intruder was in the basement area.” The Truth From the Rocky Mountain News (Charlie Brennan, August 22, 2002): “A palm print on the door leading to that same wine cellar, long unidentified, is that of Melinda Ramsey, JonBenet's adult half-sister. She was in Georgia at the time of the murder.”… and: “…L. Lin Wood, the attorney representing the Ramseys, who now live in Atlanta, doesn't debate the palm print findings…” As proof of an intruder, the Ramseys and Mr. Wood have bantered about the “unidentified” palm print. Now, according to Mr. Brennan’s article, Lin Wood doesn’t debate the finding that the palm print belongs to a Ramsey family member. Yet, Wood allows a federal judge to base part of her decision on this case using information that Wood has conceded isn’t connected to the case. Charlie Brennan, Rocky Mountain NewsAugust 22, 2002 BOULDER - Investigators have answered two vexing questions in the JonBenet Ramsey case that have long helped support the theory that an intruder killed her, according to sources Ramsey evidence is explained Hand, boot prints determined to be innocent occurrences close to the case. The answers, which have been known to investigators for some time but never publicly revealed, could be seen to weaken the intruder theory. The two clues are: • A mysterious Hi-Tec boot print in the mold on the floor of the Ramseys' wine cellar near JonBenet's body has been linked by investigators to Burke, her brother, who was 9 at the time. It is believed to have been left there under circumstances unrelated to JonBenet's murder. Burke, now 15, has repeatedly been cleared by authorities of any suspicion in the 1996 Christmas night slaying, and that has not changed. • A palm print on the door leading to that same wine cellar, long unidentified, is that of Melinda Ramsey, JonBenet's adult half-sister. She was in Georgia at the time of the murder. "They were certainly some things that had to be answered, one way or the other, and we feel satisfied that they are both answered," said a source close to the case, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. L. Lin Wood, the attorney representing the Ramseys, who now live in Atlanta, doesn't debate the palm print findings. But he contends the police have not answered the Hi-Tec print mystery. "Burke Ramsey does not and has never owned a pair of quote, unquote, trademarked Hi-Tec sneakers that the Ramseys are aware of," Wood said. "I would think they know what shoes he has owned." It's interesting that Mr. Wood would claim the police have not answered the "Hi-Tec print mystery." Forums for Justice can only assume Ramsey attorney Lin Wood never dreamed the 2000 Atlanta interviews with law enforcement the Ramseys participated in would be made public. From the Atlanta interviews it is obvious that Burke Ramsey told the Grand Jury that he indeed did own a pair of Hi Tec shoes/boots. From the Atlanta Interviews. Mr. Levin for the United States. Mr.Wood for the Ramseys. This exchange is with Mr. Levin, Patsy Ramsey, and Lin Wood. Bold has been added. 23 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Did you try, in 24 your mind, and perhaps to assist your 25 investigator, identify sources close to your 0122 1 family that might be the origin of the 2 Hi-Tec shoe impression? 3 A. I think, you know, I may have 4 asked Susan if she had ever seen any. I 5 mean, I didn't, I don't know what a Hi-Tec 6 boot looks like, per se. I have tried to 7 kind of, as I am in shoe stores, look around 8 trying to see what, what's the significance 9 and special about a Hi-Tec boot, and I 10 haven't, haven't even seen any yet. But I 11 may have asked Susan, did you know anybody 12 that looked like they wore Hi-Tec shoe, 13 boots, or whatever. 14 Q. Do you recall a period of time, 15 prior to 1996, when your son Burke purchased 16 a pair of hiking boots that had compasses on 17 the shoelaces? And if it helps to 18 remember -- 19 A. I can't remember. 20 Q. Maybe this will help your 21 recollection. They were shoes that were 22 purchased while he was shopping with you in 23 Atlanta. 24 MR. WOOD: Are you stating that 25 as a fact? 0123 1 MR. LEVIN: I am stating that as 2 a fact. 3 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Does that help 4 refresh your recollection as to whether he 5 owned a pair of shoes that had compasses on 6 them? 7 A. I just can't remember. Bought so 8 many shoes for him. 9 Q. And again, I will provide, I'll 10 say, I'll say this as a fact to you, that, 11 and maybe this will help refresh your 12 recollection, he thought that -- the shoes 13 were special because they had a compass on 14 them, his only exposure for the most part to 15 compasses had been in the plane and he kind 16 of liked the idea of being able to point 17 them different directions. Do you remember 18 him doing that with the shoes? 19 A. I can't remember the shoes. I 20 remember he had a compass thing like a 21 watch, but I can't remember about the shoes. 22 Q. You don't remember him having 23 shoes that you purchased with compasses on 24 them? 25 MR. WOOD: She will tell you that 0124 1 one more time. Go ahead and tell him, and 2 this will be the third time. 3 THE WITNESS: I can't remember. [b]4 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Okay. Does it 5 jog your memory to know that the shoes with 6 compasses were made by Hi-Tec? 7 MR. WOOD: Are you stating that 8 as a fact? 9 MR. LEVIN: Yes. I am stating 10 that as a fact. 11 THE WITNESS: No, I didn't know 12 that. 13 Q. (By Mr. Levin) I will state this 14 as a fact. There are two people who have 15 provided us with information, including your 16 son, that he owned Hi-Tec shoes prior to the 17 murder of your daughter. 18 MR. WOOD: You are stating that 19 Burke Ramsey has told you he owned Hi-Tec 20 shoes? 21 MR. LEVIN: Yes. 22 MR. WOOD: He used the phrase 23 Hi-Tec? 24 MR. LEVIN: Yes. 25 MR. WOOD: When? 0125 1 MR. LEVIN: I can't, I can't give 2 you the source. I can tell you that I have 3 that information.{/B] 4 MR. WOOD: You said Burke told 5 you. 6 MR. LEVIN: I can't quote it to 7 you for reasons I am sure, as an attorney, 8 you are aware. 9 MR. WOOD: Just so it is clear, 10 there is a difference between you saying that 11 somebody said Burke told them and Burke 12 telling you because Burke has been 13 interviewed by you all December of 1996, 14 January of 1997, June of 1998. 15 Are you saying that it is within 16 those interviews? 17 MR. LEVIN: No. 18 MR. WOOD: So he didn't tell you, 19 he told somebody else you are stating as a 20 fact because I don't think you all have 21 talked to him other than those occasions, 22 have you? 23 MR. KANE: Mr. Wood, we don't 24 want to get into grand jury information. 25 Okay? 0126 1 MR. WOOD: Okay. 2 MR. KANE: Fair enough? 3 MR. LEVIN: I am sorry, I should 4 have been more direct. I thought you would 5 understand -- `````````````````````````````````````````````````` To read all of the Atlanta 2000 interviews please go here. http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...ead.php?t=4665 The mystery of the palm print is solved. It was Melinda Ramsey's palm print on the door leading to the room where JonBenet's body was found. The mystery of the Hi-Tec boots/shoes is solved. Burke Ramsey told the Grand Jury that he did indeed own a pair of Hi-Tec boots. How Lin Wood can claim the boot print and palm print still point to an intruder is beyond comprehension.
__________________
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 |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|