Fact or Fiction?

LOL KK. My RAM just isn't what it used to be either.

Little

 

They may escape the law, but never escape punishment.

I really don't know. The Ramsey PI admitted that they were digging up dirt on Miller in case he were called to testify.

If you go to Miss Marple's site and read the stuff I gave him on Chet, that's a good start.

How's this:

Q. Do you know Richard Dusick?

A. Secret Service, yes.

Q. Is he a qualified document examiner?

A. Best of my knowledge, he is.

Q. The Secret Service is more often involved with criminal investigations than the INS is; is it not, sir?

A. Dusick has a special job there. He works with a particular database. I don't know how much actual handwriting work he does.

 

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.

 

Rashomon

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. :shamed:

Here is the whole text:

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

(Page 21/ 22)

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.

 

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.

 

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?

 

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.

 

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

 

Does anyone have a copy of the "Q's" handy from the RN and Patsy's examples?! I promise to save it this time!!!

 

Here you are, darlin'.

 

I soooooooo love you, sweetie! And those Q's!

 

Thanks for posting those q's.

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

 

You're welcome, Rat and Ames.

You couldn't find the "q" example (and the rest of the analysis) because has been taken off the internet where possible. The reason is that Michelle Dresbold tried to pass off the expert handwriting analysis/document examination work done by Cina Wong (as part of the Chris Wolf lawsuit) as her own efforts. Basically, Michelle copied the exemplars from ACandyRose's web site and used them in her book which came out last year. Michelle did not credit Cina Wong, and the way the information was presented in the book (and in press interviews), Michelle implied she had done the comparisons. When the handwriting exemplars in Michelle's book and Cina's handwriting analysis were compared side by side, it was obvious Michelle had plaigerized Cina's work.

I would never post the full handwriting analysis done by Cina Wong, but I'm certain she wouldn't mind my sharing the "q" exemplar, especially when I know it's being used for a good reason.

 

Well, is Cina going to sue Michelle??

You know...I have always from day one suspected that Patsy and John were involved in their daughter's death, and that PR had written that RN. But I am 100 percent certain that she wrote it, after seeing those q's (8's) side by side, for the first time. Just THAT alone completely convinced me that PR wrote the RN. I mean, what are the chances that the "intruder" and Patsy would write their q's, the EXACT same way???? Zero to none...

 

Cina DID take Michelle (and Simon & Shuster - Michelle's publisher) to court last year for copyright infringement. Cina was aghast when she saw Michelle take credit for her work, and rightfully so. Simon & Shuster agreed to settle the lawsuit. (We had a thread about it here at FFJ that can probably be found using the search feature).

Terms of the settlement were:

1. S & S had to pay Wong a monetary settlement.

2. S &S agreed to remove the bold "Explosive Details About JonBenet Ramsey Ransom Note" advertising on the front cover of Dresbold's book.

3. S & S had to remove Wong's work regarding her analysis of the JonBenet Ramsey ransom note from all future editions of Dresbold's book including a paperback edition scheduled for release in 2008.

 

Sooooooo, we didn't learn of these Q's from the BPD? And if not - they are aware now, aren't they?!