Forensic evidence

Yes, the main luck they had was being in the People's Republic of Boulder, where the cops were intimidated by their social status and had been "dumbed-down" for true crime over years of the Hunter regime. They were seen as victims at first and the crime scene was not protected, even as a possible kidnapping scene. But I think the cops really did not know what to do, since they knew true policework would never be tolerated in Boulder. Heck, Steve Thomas says that if he defended himself while working, he would be disciplined and sent to "diversity training" or "criminal tolerance" classes for Pete's sake.

 

Oh, yeah, Douglas knows EXACTLY why he lost credibility. He knows WHAT he did that was contrary to EVERYTHING HE EVER WROTE about profiling BEFORE the Ramsey's bought and paid for him.

But he keeps lying about it. He can't or won't admit the truth. Which is why I now see that John Douglas, like Lou Smit, began to believe his own press. Obviously, Douglas has no problem lying, just like the criminals he once dedicated himself to catching.

His feet of clay have crumbled.

 

The boobs from "Police Academy" could have done better!

 

If I were to assign resposibility for this case being FUBAR I would place 97% of the blame on the DA's office and 3% on the BPD.

 

I don't mean that the housekeeper actually knew the sum, but the Ramseys could have suggested LHP might have seen John's payslip lying around somewhere. And since they had to write the ransom note on pen and paper from their own home, the idea of implicating the housekeeper may have been on their mind also. Not that the housekeeper was the only one they had in mind when concocting the note - therefore to make it appear as if an Access Graphics employee like for example Jeff Merrick had written the note may have been on the Ramseys' mind too. They simply threw everything they could into the mix of the RN, which is why the note as a whole is such a jumbled mess.
There is no doubt imo that Patsy knew about the sum, and it is simply incredibly naive on the part of John Douglas to state that Patsy did not know the sum of John's bonus. All he had was her word that she didn't know!
I never would have thought that a criminal profiler would let himself be deceived so easily. Fascinating.

 

rashomon posted:

"I never would have thought that a criminal profiler would let himself be deceived so easily."

John Douglas' work for the Ramsey's was compared to that of a high-priced whore. Douglas lost the respect of his peers...a terrible price to pay.

 

I agree. The mindset in Boulder at the time, and still today, seems to be that it's better for the police to love all members of the community and treat criminals with the respect they deserve. But this doesn't come from the cops directly. It's all from above, and the DA controls all that. The love-fest and sheer stupidity continue with Lacy on the job.

Hey

 

And he still can't understand why.

 

I totally agree.

 

I love your new psychic ability to post the answer to a question before the question is even asked!! How cool is this??? Please tell us who actually killed JonBenet, so we can have a wrap party and go back to our real lives!

:coffeeup:

 

I saw him on television right after the Karr thing exploded on the screen and the interviewer said "you were right after all" and he said "yes, I am getting all kinds of calls from former colleagues saying "John, you were right".

Looking back, I do not believe he received those calls at all. The profilers most likely did not believe Karr; I know I did not from the first. Why he (Douglas) would go on television at the time is beyond me. Nothing at all had been proven. He was like a teenager jumping up and down and NOT waiting to see if it were at all TRUE that Karr did it.

His credibility sinks to an all time low. And he did that to himself. :elfroll:

 

BWAH!!! :laffbig:

EGO.

Who's his agent? Do you think he's doing appearances now? Let's call him and see!

 

Yes, I figured this is what you were thinking about Linda Hoffman Pugh.

It was unbelievable how John Ramsey listed off some of his Access Graphics staff, with Jeff Merrick heading the list. John Ramsey will never be able to look at any of his old colleagues straight in the eye "ever" again.

John Douglas linked Tom Carson's name to this "suspicious dinner" list of Access Graphic colleagues of John. The one mentioned by Jeff Merrick on the Peter Boyles audio.

 

Now he says he never made a profile for them!

He sure has a bad memory for a lawman.

 

Who is he telling this to? Didn't he once say that he returned the money they paid him?

 

I just posted what was related to the Jeff Merrick post. My friend Little saves me from typing out a few pages. I have the paperback, She has the Hard Back, and scans a few pages for me in seconds. It sure does save me a lot of work, and it confirms the information is from Det. Steve Thomas' book, and they can go and read it in their own books. and find out more information themselves,

With my paper back, the information below starts halfway through page 136. The paragraph before this is about the duct tape bought from McGuckin's hardware store.

I did order a hardcover from Amazon, and it went astray. :-( So much easier to work from than a paperback. Meanwhile Little has been of tremendous help to me.

The following scan is immediately before the one above. btw I have attempted scanning a few pages myself, but the text was actually changed, and I had to correct it (?).

 

Patsy asked Arndt why the author of the ransom note had not asked for a larger sum of money, or at least a round sum of money.

I nearly fell off my chair when I read this....I watched the film Ransom last week. At one point Mel Gibson's character turns to the FBI man and asks him why the kidnapper's had not asked for a larger sum of money as everyone knew how much he was worth.

The reply was they knew this amount was easy to get hold of at short notice..or maybe that's all they need.

 

I'm sorry if this has been asked and answered before PR claimed that her fibres may have ended up on JB because she threw herself on top of the body after John had brought JB upstairs.

But, if I am reading it correctly, John covered JB with a blanket before the officer could stop him and before PR threw herself on top...so the blanket would have PR's fibres not the body..surely? Or am I missing something?

1999 September 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 - Today Show with Detective Linda Arndt

Vargas: You said it was apparent, even from that distance away, that she was dead

Arndt: There was no doubt.

Vargas: How did you know?

Arndt: She had rigor mortis. Her arms were rigid right above her head with no support.

Vargas: When John Ramsey went to call 911, what did you do?

Arndt: I took JonBenét. I moved her from the hallway to the, um, the living room. I carried her just with the, the forearms. And I was cognizant that she was my sole responsibility, and the preservation of her was my responsibility. And was careful how I carried her, out of this pathway of heavy traffic. And I put her in the living room. She looked like she was sleeping. John Ramsey came back and he says, "can we please, could you please cover her body?" And as he's saying it, he's already put the blanket on top of her.

(Voice Over) Det. Arndt would later be criticized for allowing John Ramsey to place a blanket on his daughter's body, jeopardizing the crime scene. It is a decision we will revisit with her, later.

Arndt: John was next to JonBenét and, he did, uh, I guess his good-bye. And, uh, I heard, a wail, just a guttural, moan, aching wail from the back area. And, it was, uh, probably one of the most pitiful things I've heard and anguished. And I saw the rest of the people; Patsy and the pastor and the four friends, come from the den towards the living room. And, there's just so much, there's so much pain. (long pause) And tears, and noise.

(VO) Still the only police officer in the house, the Detective waited and asked the pastor to lead the Ramseys and their friends in prayer.

Arndt: I thought that would be the best way to organize everyone, to keep them distracted, to keep them from touching JonBenét and to keep them focused.

Vargas: this house had suddenly become a homicide crime scene.

Arndt: Ah, it became hell. It became hell. JonBenét was brought up at about five minutes after 1:00, and, um, at ten after, nobody had shown up. And I called 911. And I said, I gave them my radio number. I said the kidnapping has turned into a murder.

http://www.acandyrose.com/crimescene-morning.htm

 

Not necessarily, Amber. For one thing, the fibers from Patsy's jacket were found ENTWINED in the cord around JB's neck. Just laying a blanket on top of her or throwing oneself on top of her wouldn't explain the fibers entwined in that cord. It also doesn't stand to reason that because the blanket was the first to come in contact that morning with JB after she was brought upstairs, Patsy's jacket fibers had to be on the blanket. If the fibers hadn't been entwined in the cord, they could have been transference, as you said, but they could also have been put there directly when Patsy threw herself over JB's body.

 

That''s what I'm getting at - the entwined fibres cannot be explained by PR throwing herself on JB - but that's how she explains it.

Add the fact that the body was covered with the blanket before and during the time she touched the body, means that the likelihood of transference of fibres from PR to JB is even less likely, but it's the excuse she uses during questioning.

If the blanket covers JB after PR lays on top of her then her defence could argue transference...but if the she lays on top AFTER the blanket is laid on top then transference to the body is impossible. I was always under the impression that the blanket was applied AFTER PR's Lazarus speech. not before