Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 157
Like Tree209Likes

Thread: JonBenet Ramsey's brother gives his first-ever interview with Dr. Phil

  1. #76
    Elite Member sprynkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    At the salon
    Posts
    17,869

    Default

    KrisNine: You need to see how Burke "re-enacted" hitting her over the head with a flashlight in that interview. It was very eerie.
    dilligaf likes this.

    Meryl doesn't even try anymore. She just calls Lanvin and asks for curtains with a belt.~Bitter
    Can we interest you in Leann Rimes? She has a nice little cadre of fans you'd probably enjoy.~ Pecan Pie

  2. #77
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    24,817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fgg View Post
    i think burke did it and the ramsey's covered it up. it makes no sense otherwise.
    For Burke to have done it, though, part of the coverup would have involved inviting some strange guy who was not a family member or friend over, have him molest the body and leave his DNA where it would be found later, but not linked to anyone and not on a national registry.

    Plus, the blow to the head did not kill her. The autopsy stated that asphyxiation did. So, the accusations against the Ramsey's amounts to saying that they found her alive with a serious head wound and instead of calling the ambulance, they finished the job in a really grisly manner.

  3. #78
    Elite Member Nevan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,100

    Default

    ^^^ From everything I've read, the DNA in the underwear was minute and that most forensics experts feel the DNA on the long johns was just transfer.

    Dr. Lee and Dr. Spitz both believe the autopsy report is wrong or misleading in saying that she was asphyxiated. They said the head wound was traumatic enough to be the cause of death. She might have been unconscious afterwards, but the asphyxiation was not needed to kill her. The garrote was overkill, so to speak.
    panic likes this.

  4. #79
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    24,817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nevan View Post
    ^^^ From everything I've read, the DNA in the underwear was minute and that most forensics experts feel the DNA on the long johns was just transfer.

    Dr. Lee and Dr. Spitz both believe the autopsy report is wrong or misleading in saying that she was asphyxiated. They said the head wound was traumatic enough to be the cause of death. She might have been unconscious afterwards, but the asphyxiation was not needed to kill her. The garrote was overkill, so to speak.
    Yeah, but most lay people wouldn't have known the difference, and it is very hard to imagine parents of a young child running with the assumption that a nearly dead child was unsavable and then go to plan B which involves desecrating her body to an unbelievable extent.

    And back to the DNA. There was transfer DNA on the outside of her long johns - on both sides. And blood DNA inside her panties. And all locations matched the same profile. That is not casual or accidental. That is DNA of someone who was deeply involved in this, if not the perpetrator. The fact that it didn't match anyone - the family, friends, or even the people who performed the autopsy - blows major holes in the theory that the Ramsey's were involved in her death.
    lindsaywhit likes this.

  5. #80
    Elite Member sprynkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    At the salon
    Posts
    17,869

    Default

    A theory from the CBS show I found interesting.
    The 2 small holes on her side, thought to be taser marks but possibly from a toy train track seen nearby the body did not bleed. Meaning she was dead before those marks were made. So, Burke whacked her over the head. Then poked her with the track to see if she would move. I do not understand the choking part though.
    panic and dilligaf like this.

    Meryl doesn't even try anymore. She just calls Lanvin and asks for curtains with a belt.~Bitter
    Can we interest you in Leann Rimes? She has a nice little cadre of fans you'd probably enjoy.~ Pecan Pie

  6. #81
    fgg
    fgg is offline
    Elite Member fgg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    29,635

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MohandasKGanja View Post
    For Burke to have done it, though, part of the coverup would have involved inviting some strange guy who was not a family member or friend over, have him molest the body and leave his DNA where it would be found later, but not linked to anyone and not on a national registry.

    Plus, the blow to the head did not kill her. The autopsy stated that asphyxiation did. So, the accusations against the Ramsey's amounts to saying that they found her alive with a serious head wound and instead of calling the ambulance, they finished the job in a really grisly manner.
    you are ignoring all of the posts from everyone who watched the cbs special.

    on that show, it was stated that the blow to the skull is what killed her and whoever did that strangled her afterwards because they thought she wasn't dead. the dna came from whoever worked at the facility where the underwear was made & packaged. burke had a history of violence and is very odd, to say the least. the cops and fbi agents who were there that morning said john ramsey was acting very strangely, disappeared for an hour of time and immediately found the body (in a dark room as soon as he opened the door) when they searched the house. there is lots of evidence that points to the ramsey family but there were pressures not to put the rich family out or ask them uncomfortable questions when this happened years ago.
    panic and dilligaf like this.
    can't post pics because my computer's broken and i'm stupid

  7. #82
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    24,817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fgg View Post
    you are ignoring all of the posts from everyone who watched the cbs special.

    on that show, it was stated that the blow to the skull is what killed her and whoever did that strangled her afterwards because they thought she wasn't dead. the dna came from whoever worked at the facility where the underwear was made & packaged. burke had a history of violence and is very odd, to say the least. the cops and fbi agents who were there that morning said john ramsey was acting very strangely, disappeared for an hour of time and immediately found the body (in a dark room as soon as he opened the door) when they searched the house. there is lots of evidence that points to the ramsey family but there were pressures not to put the rich family out or ask them uncomfortable questions when this happened years ago.
    No, I am not ignoring that, but the actual physical DNA evidence, completely contradicts the scenarios that people are putting forth. The DNA was found on two different sets of underwear - 1) inside her panties, and 2) outside her long johns. One was blood DNA, and the other was touch DNA. That did not come from some factory.

  8. #83
    Elite Member Nevan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,100

    Default

    Her long johns and panties were believed to have been removed from Jonbenet (definitely the long johns, I think they were put back on inside out, IIRC). Absolutely blood DNA could have come from the factory. Again, it was a minute amount, maybe somebody stuck themselves with a needle while threading the machine. And the touch DNA would have just been transfer from that.

    It seems you're strongly pro-Ramsey, which is perfectly fine. Do you agree that literally everything else but that random DNA supports that someone from inside the home murdered her? Once you get over that leap of knowing the panties were brand new and not washed before being given to Jonbenet, and that everything involving the killing and covering up of this poor girl's murder, it all leads back to the family. I don't think Patsy went into a rage, and John hasn't displayed violence that we know of, but Burke was known to have a temper and actually clobbered (the exact word John used) Jonbenet with a golf club in the face in anger earlier that year. And that flashlight. It was out in the middle of the counter but had NO fingerprints on it, not even on the batteries.

  9. #84
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    24,817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nevan View Post
    Her long johns and panties were believed to have been removed from Jonbenet (definitely the long johns, I think they were put back on inside out, IIRC). Absolutely blood DNA could have come from the factory. Again, it was a minute amount, maybe somebody stuck themselves with a needle while threading the machine. And the touch DNA would have just been transfer from that.

    It seems you're strongly pro-Ramsey, which is perfectly fine. Do you agree that literally everything else but that random DNA supports that someone from inside the home murdered her? Once you get over that leap of knowing the panties were brand new and not washed before being given to Jonbenet, and that everything involving the killing and covering up of this poor girl's murder, it all leads back to the family. I don't think Patsy went into a rage, and John hasn't displayed violence that we know of, but Burke was known to have a temper and actually clobbered (the exact word John used) Jonbenet with a golf club in the face in anger earlier that year. And that flashlight. It was out in the middle of the counter but had NO fingerprints on it, not even on the batteries.
    I'm pro evidence - and I will, and have changed my stance on the guilt of certain people in certain crimes when extra information came out (which is why I changed my mind in the Amanda Knox case). I believe what is supported by the physical evidence as basically the highest priority, and do not put a lot of stock on people's behavior when they were being questioned or afterward.

    I don't know why you are approaching the DNA found on the two sets of underwear as anything but mutually exclusive. The DNA from the panties was blood DNA. And it was DNA mixed with hers. Her blood didn't come from the factory. Second, the touch DNA was not found on her panties, but on the long johns. They were found on the outside of both sides of the long johns as opposed to the crotch of the panties where the blood was found. There is no reasonable scenario where a factory worker leaves DNA on three separate areas of two pieces of underwear that are not in contact with each other. Which is why I believe that the DA took the move to state all of this in an apology letter to the Ramsey's.

    ETA - in this article, they also mention that the DNA found in the underwear was also found under her fingernails. So, that is actually, four separate areas of DNA all matching the same profile of someone who is not the Ramsey's.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/jonbenet...s-out-parents/

  10. #85
    Elite Member sprynkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    At the salon
    Posts
    17,869

    Default

    panic and fgg like this.

    Meryl doesn't even try anymore. She just calls Lanvin and asks for curtains with a belt.~Bitter
    Can we interest you in Leann Rimes? She has a nice little cadre of fans you'd probably enjoy.~ Pecan Pie

  11. #86
    Elite Member panic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,379

    Default

    ^^i just got the chills for a second after i scrolled over that flashlight.

    I would be agreeing with everything Mo is saying if I hadn't seen the cbs doc last week. That was my same argument.

    When the lab tested that sample after JonBenet's murder, they didn't follow thorough procedures.

    When generating a DNA profile for a forensic purpose, 13 markers are specifically chosen because studies had shown they're very likely to be different from one individual to another. Coombes, the investigator working with DA at the time, said they reduced the standard down to 4 markers and the lab matched the long johns DNA to the DNA found in JonBenet's underwear. The fewer markers you look at, the greater the chance that 2 people might appear to be the same, when in reality, they're different.

    DA Lacey still chose to exonerate the Ramseys despite the lower standard. The DNA test results on the underwear by themselves should not be what this case hangs on, according to the profiling expert on the ID doc, because the test results can't tell us if the perpetrator was someone inside the Ramsey house or an intruder. He said it would be a mistake to rule anyone out. If you're interested the ID doc, the title is "JonBenet: An American Murder Mystery." There's 3 parts, each an hour long. You can probably catch it On Demand.

    On the CBS doc they said DA Lacey shouldn't have exonerated anybody based on transfer DNA. DNA can transfer from one garment that's worn on top of another garment. The DNA on the garrote, the pen, the note and the flashlight are more important and the flashlight was wiped clean before the cops got there.

    Coombs also said that DA Lacey had an unusual relationship with John Ramsey. Never before had he seen a case where one of the suspects was brought into the office for informal conversation, obviously for the interest of remaining objective. He also said it was understood that DA Lacey believed in the intruder theory and if you didn't, you were forced out of the investigation. It was get off the case or fall in line.

    Also, the doc on the ID channel is the one with the side by side comparison of Patsy's handwriting compared to the ransom note. I'd be interested to see if anyone watches that and still thinks she didn't write that note.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nevan View Post
    Burke was known to have a temper and actually clobbered (the exact word John used) Jonbenet with a golf club in the face in anger earlier that year. And that flashlight. It was out in the middle of the counter but had NO fingerprints on it, not even on the batteries.


    Also, and this is gross so if you're eating or just squeamish, skip to the next paragraph. One of the former housekeepers told them about Burke smearing feces on the bathroom wall. There was a softball-sized ball of feces found in JonBenet's bed at some point. After they sealed off JonBenet's room, the crime scene techs found feces smeared on a box of candy she had gotten the day before Christmas.

    And Burke never asked the detective, who interviewed him an hour after JonBenet was found, if his sister had been found, what happened to her, were they going to get her back, nothing about his sister.
    MmeVertigina likes this.
    "I would have gladly held my nose and did the right thing all damn day long to keep Trump out of the fucking White House and it wouldn't have butt hurt me at all."...gas_chick


  12. #87
    Elite Member Novice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Beyond Caring, then hang a left.
    Posts
    41,593

    Default

    All that proves is that there were some seriously disturbed people living in that house and given the sexual abuse. Hardly surprising.
    It's also possible that Burke was also sexually or otherwise abused.
    Quote Originally Posted by pinkbunnyslippers View Post
    There has to be another reason why he is doing the interview, other than "I don't want people to forget". Don't worry, we haven't.
    For better or worse. There have been multiple UK murders that have been solved recently, from 30-50 yrs ago....
    Quote Originally Posted by Charmed Hour View Post
    I think depending on what you're watching it sways, especially for me. I still don't think a Ramsey committed the actual crime but they sure as hell covered it up. Not so well.

    Back in 1999 the Grand Jury voted for indictment , the Boulder DA declined to charge them citing lack of evidence. I just found a site with the GJ transcripts. It was 55 days long and lots of people testified.
    Pls would you pm me the link?
    Free Charmed.

  13. #88
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    24,817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by panic View Post
    ^^i just got the chills for a second after i scrolled over that flashlight.

    I would be agreeing with everything Mo is saying if I hadn't seen the cbs doc last week. That was my same argument.

    When the lab tested that sample after JonBenet's murder, they didn't follow thorough procedures.

    When generating a DNA profile for a forensic purpose, 13 markers are specifically chosen because studies had shown they're very likely to be different from one individual to another. Coombes, the investigator working with DA at the time, said they reduced the standard down to 4 markers and the lab matched the long johns DNA to the DNA found in JonBenet's underwear. The fewer markers you look at, the greater the chance that 2 people might appear to be the same, when in reality, they're different.

    DA Lacey still chose to exonerate the Ramseys despite the lower standard. The DNA test results on the underwear by themselves should not be what this case hangs on, according to the profiling expert on the ID doc, because the test results can't tell us if the perpetrator was someone inside the Ramsey house or an intruder. He said it would be a mistake to rule anyone out. If you're interested the ID doc, the title is "JonBenet: An American Murder Mystery." There's 3 parts, each an hour long. You can probably catch it On Demand.

    On the CBS doc they said DA Lacey shouldn't have exonerated anybody based on transfer DNA. DNA can transfer from one garment that's worn on top of another garment. The DNA on the garrote, the pen, the note and the flashlight are more important and the flashlight was wiped clean before the cops got there.

    Coombs also said that DA Lacey had an unusual relationship with John Ramsey. Never before had he seen a case where one of the suspects was brought into the office for informal conversation, obviously for the interest of remaining objective. He also said it was understood that DA Lacey believed in the intruder theory and if you didn't, you were forced out of the investigation. It was get off the case or fall in line.
    Okay, there are articles on this issue Coombes brought up. Here is my take on this:

    1. The articles say that while Coombes worked briefly for the Boulder police department (2008-2011), he did not work directly on the case. Which makes me suspicious of his direct knowledge about the handling of DNA evidence.
    2. The DNA Coombes is referring to is the touch DNA from the outside of the long johns. Not the DNA found inside the underwear and under the fingernails. This means that Coombes is not able to dismiss the DNA testing and results on these items.
    3. The Boulder police department did not do the touch DNA testing. Bode Technology Group in Lorton, Virginia did the testing. If less markers were used in the testing, which would be highly unusual because touch testing by definition uses 13 markers, it would not have been the DA's decision, but the decision of a lab far away.
    4. Whatever the number of markers used, they didn't match the DNA of any of the Ramsey's either. So, while Coombes statement (assuming it is credible in the first place) puts the idea of a profile match from all sample areas in doubt, it does not refute the statement by the DA that all DNA collected from Benet's body excluded the Ramsey's as the people who left the DNA.

  14. #89
    Elite Member sprynkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    At the salon
    Posts
    17,869

    Default

    Did they test all the people rambling around the crime scene? It sounds like it was such a sloppy deal all the way. J.R took the body upstairs and laid her by the Christmas tree. What a cluster FK. All the DNA evidence could have been compromised.
    fgg and panic like this.

    Meryl doesn't even try anymore. She just calls Lanvin and asks for curtains with a belt.~Bitter
    Can we interest you in Leann Rimes? She has a nice little cadre of fans you'd probably enjoy.~ Pecan Pie

  15. #90
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    24,817

    Default

    Moving her body isn't going to deposit the same DNA profile in four different areas of her body. Also, I think they tested 100-200 people. I would think that included people who had been in the house the night she died and shortly thereafter.
    Last edited by MohandasKGanja; September 28th, 2016 at 11:11 AM. Reason: tasted/tested

Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Barbara Walters to interview father of JonBenet Ramsey
    By *Wookie-Chick* in forum Crime and Punishment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 28th, 2015, 10:08 PM
  2. Replies: 153
    Last Post: March 15th, 2012, 12:24 AM
  3. JonBenet Ramsey's Father Remarries
    By PrettyGirl in forum Latest Gossip
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: July 31st, 2011, 05:21 PM
  4. JonBenet Ramsey death house on the market
    By twitchy2.0 in forum News
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: February 24th, 2011, 02:41 PM
  5. JonBenet Ramsey's mother dies
    By Palermo in forum Gossip Archive
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: June 30th, 2006, 06:32 PM

Posting Permissions

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