Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.



Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 7
» Latest member: John Andrew
» Forum threads: 1,580
» Forum posts: 5,032

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 25 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 25 Guest(s)

Latest Threads
Linda Arndt on GMA
Forum: good primer, perhaps
Last Post: jameson245
11 hours ago
» Replies: 6
» Views: 62
The Final Suspects
Forum: What is in the news - staying up to date
Last Post: Dave
02-18-2020, 12:57 PM
» Replies: 11
» Views: 707
from Steve Thomas depo
Forum: Fleet and Priscilla White
Last Post: jameson245
02-14-2020, 04:46 PM
» Replies: 3
» Views: 1,969
Fleet quotes
Forum: Fleet and Priscilla White
Last Post: jameson245
02-13-2020, 04:43 PM
» Replies: 4
» Views: 13
DA Stan Garnett on the GJ...
Forum: Grand Jury Indictments
Last Post: jameson245
02-13-2020, 04:42 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 819
Alan Prendergast - westwa...
Forum: Nancy Krebs
Last Post: jameson245
02-13-2020, 04:26 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 8
hunter's announcement
Forum: Grand Jury Indictments
Last Post: jameson245
02-13-2020, 04:17 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 114
calling for a Grand Jury
Forum: Grand Jury Indictments
Last Post: jameson245
02-13-2020, 03:53 PM
» Replies: 8
» Views: 2,098
Atlanta confrontation
Forum: Fleet and Priscilla White
Last Post: jameson245
02-13-2020, 03:48 PM
» Replies: 6
» Views: 1,480
Priscilla quotes
Forum: Fleet and Priscilla White
Last Post: jameson245
02-13-2020, 03:11 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 10

  Lacy letter to John Ramsey
Posted by: jameson245 - 09-07-2019, 01:23 PM - Forum: DNA - Touch DNA on long johns - No Replies

July 9, 2008
Mr. John Ramsey,
 As you are aware, since December 2002, the Boulder District Attorney's Office has been the agency responsible for the investigation of the homicide of your daughter, JonBenet. I understand that the fact that we have not been able to identify the person who killed her is a great disappointment that is a continuing hardship for you and your family.
 However, significant new evidence has recently been discovered through the application of relatively new methods of DNA analysis. This new scientific evidence convinces us that it is appropriate, given the circumstances of this case, to state that we do not consider your immediate family including you, your wife, Patsy, and your son, Burke, to be under any suspicion in the commission of this crime. I wish we could have done so before Mrs. Ramsey died.
 We became aware last summer that some private laboratories were conducting a new methodology described as "touch DNA." One method of sampling for touch DNA is the "scraping method." This is a process in which forensic scientists scrape places where there are no stains or other signs of the possible presence of DNA to recover for analysis any genetic material that might nonetheless be present. We contracted with the Bode Technology Group, a highly reputable laboratory recommended to us by several law enforcement agencies to use the scraping method for touch DNA on the long johns that JonBenet wore and that were probably handled by the perpetrator during the course of this crime.
 The Bode Technology laboratory was able to develop a profile from DNA recovered from the two sides of the long johns. The previously identified profile from the crotch of the underwear worn by JonBenet at the time of the murder matched the DNA recovered from the long johns at Bode.
 Unexplained DNA on the victim of a crime is powerful evidence. The match of male DNA on two separate items of clothing worn by the victim at the time of the murder makes it clear to us that an unknown male handled these items. Despite substantial efforts over the years to identify the source of this DNA, there is no innocent explanation for its incriminating presence at three sites on these two different items of clothing that JonBenet was wearing at the time of her murder.
 Solving this crime remains our goal, and its ultimate resolution will depend on more than just matching DNA. However, given the history of the publicity surrounding this case, I believe it is important and appropriate to provide you with our opinion that your family was not responsible for this crime. Based on the DNA results and our serious consideration of all the other evidence, we are comfortable that the profile now in CODIS is the profile of the perpetrator of this murder.
 To the extent that we may have contributed in any way to the public perception that you might have been involved in this crime, I am deeply sorry: No innocent person should have to endure such an extensive trial in the court of public opinion, especially when public officials have not had sufficient evidence to initiate a trial in a court of law. I have the greatest respect for the way you and your family have handled this adversity.
 I am aware that there will be those who will choose to continue to differ with our conclusion. But DNA is very often the most reliable forensic evidence we can hope to find and we rely on it often to bring to justice those who have committed crimes. I am very comfortable that our conclusion that this evidence has vindicated your family is based firmly on all of the evidence, including the reliable forensic DNA evidence that has been developed as a result of advances in that scientific field during this investigation.
 We intend in the future to treat you as the victims of this crime, with the sympathy due you because of the horrific loss you suffered. Otherwise, we will continue to refrain from publicly discussing the evidence in this case.
 We hope that we will one day obtain a DNA match from the CODIS data bank that will lead to further evidence and to the solution of this crime. With recent legislative changes throughout the country, the number of profiles available for comparison in the CODIS data bank is growing steadily. Law enforcement agencies are receiving increasing numbers of cold hits on DNA profiles that have been in the system for many years. We hope that one day soon we will get a match to this perpetrator. We will, of course, contact you immediately. Perhaps only then will we begin to understand the psychopathy or motivation for this brutal and senseless crime.
 Mary T. Lacy
 District Attorney
 Twentieth Judicial District
 Boulder, Colorado

Print this item

  press release
Posted by: jameson245 - 09-07-2019, 11:13 AM - Forum: DNA - Touch DNA on long johns - No Replies

Wednesday, July 09, 2008

Ramsey Press Release

Boulder District Attorney Mary T. Lacy issues the following announcement with regard to the investigation of the murder of JonBenet Ramsey.
On December 25-26, 1996, JonBenet Ramsey was murdered in the home where she lived with her mother, father and brother.  Despite a long and intensive investigation, the death of JonBenet remains unsolved. 
The murder has received unprecedented publicity and has been shrouded in controversy.  That publicity has led to many theories over the years in which suspicion has focused on one family member or another.  However, there has been at least one persistent stumbling block to the possibility of prosecuting any Ramsey family members for the death of JonBenet – DNA. 
As part of its investigation of the JonBenet Ramsey homicide, the Boulder Police identified genetic material with apparent evidentiary value.  Over time, the police continued to investigate DNA, including taking advantage of advances in the science and methodology.  One of the results of their efforts was that they identified genetic material and a DNA profile from drops of JonBenet’s blood located in the crotch of the underwear she was wearing at the time her body was discovered.  That genetic profile belongs to a male and does not belong to anyone in the Ramsey family. 
The police department diligently compared that profile to a very large number of people associated with the victim, with her family, and with the investigation, and has not identified the source, innocent or otherwise, of this DNA.  The Boulder Police and prosecutors assigned to this investigation in the past also worked conscientiously with laboratory analysts to obtain better results through new approaches and additional tests as they became available.  Those efforts ultimately led to the discovery of sufficient genetic markers from this male profile to enter it into the national DNA data bank.
In December of 2002, the Boulder District Attorney’s Office, under Mary T. Lacy, assumed responsibility for the investigation of the JonBenet Ramsey homicide.  Since then, this office has worked with the Boulder Police Department to continue the investigation of this crime.
In early August of 2007, District Attorney Lacy attended a Continuing Education Program in West Virginia sponsored by the National Institute of Justice on Forensic Biology and DNA.  The presenters discussed successful outcomes from a new methodology described as “touch DNA.”  One method for sampling for touch DNA is the “scraping method.”  In this process, forensic scientists scrape a surface where there is no observable stain or other indication of possible DNA in an effort to recover for analysis any genetic material that might nonetheless be present.  This methodology was not well known in this country until recently and is still used infrequently.
In October of 2007, we decided to pursue the possibility of submitting additional items from the JonBenet Ramsey homicide to be examined using this methodology.  We checked with a number of Colorado sources regarding which private laboratory to use for this work.  Based upon multiple recommendations, including that of the Boulder Police Department, we contacted the Bode Technology Group located near Washington, D.C., and initiated discussions with the professionals at that laboratory.  First Assistant District Attorney Peter Maguire and Investigator Andy Horita spent a full day with staff members at the Bode facility in early December of 2007.
The Bode Technology laboratory applied the “touch DNA” scraping method to both sides of the waist area of the long johns that JonBenet Ramsey was wearing over her underwear when her body was discovered.  These sites were chosen because evidence supports the likelihood that the perpetrator removed and/or replaced the long johns, perhaps by handling them on the sides near the waist.
On March 24, 2008, Bode informed us that they had recovered and identified genetic material from both sides of the waist area of the long johns.  The unknown male profile previously identified from the inside crotch area of the underwear matched the DNA recovered from the long johns at Bode. 
We consulted with a DNA expert from a different laboratory, who recommended additional investigation into the remote possibility that the DNA might have come from sources at the autopsy when this clothing was removed.  Additional samples were obtained and then analyzed by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation to assist us in this effort.  We received those results on June 27th of this year and are, as a result, confidant that this DNA did not come from innocent sources at the autopsy.  As mentioned above, extensive DNA testing had previously excluded people connected to the family and to the investigation as possible innocent sources. 
I want to acknowledge my appreciation for the efforts of the Boulder Police Department, Bode Technology Group, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, and the Denver Police Department Forensic Laboratory for the great work and assistance they have contributed to this investigation.  
The unexplained third party DNA on the clothing of the victim is very significant and powerful evidence.  It is very unlikely that there would be an innocent explanation for DNA found at three different locations on two separate items of clothing worn by the victim at the time of her murder.  This is particularly true in this case because the matching DNA profiles were found on genetic material from inside the crotch of the victim’s underwear and near the waist on both sides of her long johns, and because concerted efforts that might identify a source, and perhaps an innocent explanation, were unsuccessful. 
It is therefore the position of the Boulder District Attorney’s Office that this profile belongs to the perpetrator of the homicide.
DNA is very often the most reliable forensic evidence we can hope to find during a criminal investigation.  We rely on it often to bring to justice those who have committed crimes.  It can likewise be reliable evidence upon which to remove people from suspicion in appropriate cases.
The Boulder District Attorney’s Office does not consider any member of the Ramsey family, including John, Patsy, or Burke Ramsey, as suspects in this case.  We make this announcement now because we have recently obtained this new scientific evidence that adds significantly to the exculpatory value of the previous scientific evidence.  We do so with full appreciation for the other evidence in this case.
Local, national, and even international publicity has focused on the murder of JonBenet Ramsey.  Many members of the public came to believe that one or more of the Ramseys, including her mother or her father or even her brother, were responsible for this brutal homicide.  Those suspicions were not based on evidence that had been tested in court; rather, they were based on evidence reported by the media.
It is the responsibility of every prosecutor to seek justice.  That responsibility includes seeking justice for people whose reputations and lives can be damaged irreparably by the lingering specter of suspicion.  In a highly publicized case, the detrimental impact of publicity and suspicion on people’s lives can be extreme.  The suspicions about the Ramseys in this case created an ongoing living hell for the Ramsey family and their friends, which added to their suffering from the unexplained and devastating loss of JonBenet. 
For reasons including those discussed above, we believe that justice dictates that the Ramseys be treated only as victims of this very serious crime.  We will accord them all the rights guaranteed to the victims of violent crimes under the law in Colorado and all the respect and sympathy due from one human being to another.  To the extent that this office has added to the distress suffered by the Ramsey family at any time or to any degree, I offer my deepest apology. 
We prefer that any tips related to this ongoing investigation be submitted in writing or via electronic mail to BoulderDA.org, but they can also be submitted to our tip line at 
(303) 441-1636.
This office will make no further statements.  To read the text of the letter to John Ramsey click here.

Print this item

  letter to Moonves - CBS
Posted by: jameson245 - 08-17-2019, 12:33 PM - Forum: Fleet and Priscilla White - No Replies

[Image: photogrid_1565949743198-jpg.198683]

this is all found

Print this item

  Testa retires - Weinheimer in
Posted by: jameson245 - 08-17-2019, 10:42 AM - Forum: 2019 - Replies (1)

BOULDER, CO — Boulder Deputy Police Chief Carey Weinheimer, a 29-year veteran of the Boulder Police Department, will serve as interim police chief when Chief Greg Testa retires Sept. 3. Testa has served as Boulder Police Chief since 2014.
Weinheimer is expected to serve in the role for about 10 months until a new police chief is hired in 2020.
"Deputy Chief Weinheimer has played an essential role in maintaining the high standards of the department and in building our strong relationships with community members to ensure the Boulder Department continues to represent Boulder's values and a safe community for all individuals who live, work and visit here," said Jane Brautigam, Boulder city manager, in a statement. "I am confident that Deputy Chief Weinheimer is well prepared to lead the department with the full support of the leadership team and the respect of our officers throughout the organization."
Testa, who worked for the Boulder Police Department for 32 years, said it's been an "honor to serve the community."
Weinheimer joined the Boulder Police Department in 1990, and has since served as an officer, detective, sergeant, commander and deputy chief. He has been closely involved in the management of the police department and has worked with the city organization to launch the first-ever Boulder Stop Data Report, the city said. Weinheimer also is a member of the city's racial equity team and works with the Government Alliance on Racial Equity to improve treatment of all community members.
"We are fortunate that our police department is a healthy organization, and one that continues to challenge itself to be innovative, transparent and to reflect our community values," said Brautigam. "Deputy Chief Weinheimer understands the Police Department and the community. I am confident that he will be a strong interim chief until a new police chief is selected."
The city will conduct a search process for the next chief of police beginning in the fourth quarter of this year.
"In our search for Boulder's next police chief, understanding this community's values, maintaining strong department leadership, and partnering with residents to ensure Boulder has a transparent and equitable police force is essential" Brautigam said. "As part of our selection process, we will provide opportunities for the community to meet with the finalists and provide input on the candidates."
A date has not yet been set to fill the position. The city will work closely with law enforcement officers from outside organizations to evaluate candidates on policing standards, leadership, experience and preparedness to serve the Boulder community as chief of police.

Print this item

  Stephen Diamond's thoughts
Posted by: jameson245 - 08-08-2019, 06:18 PM - Forum: Ransom Note - Replies (22)

My comments under the line

What follows is a breakdown of the ransom note, exactly as it was written on several pages torn from the bedside pad of Patsy Ramsey and printed with a black felt pen (taken from and then interestingly returned to its original place in the home), before reportedly being found and read by Mrs. Ramsey. According to her, the strange note was apparently intentionally left on the stairs leading down from her bedroom to the home's main level. This odd choice on the part of the writer is curious unto itself. What led him or her to leave the letter on the stairs instead of, say, on the kitchen table or in the bedroom of either John and Patsy or JonBenet? If the intent was for the letter be discovered as early in the morning as possible, how could the alleged kidnapper have known of Patsy's habit of rising early and walking down these stairs to the kitchen to make coffee in the morning, unless the writer was intimately familiar with her daily routine? The note could have been left instead in the bathroom, for instance, where it might have been sooner seen, or right on the Ramsey's nightstand or on JonBenet's empty bed, the latter being the more dramatic and perhaps expected placement, stating and starkly demonstrating that we have taken your daughter from her bed and, to prove it, left this ransom note in her stead. But it was supposedly placed instead on the stairs for some unknown reason. This suggests to me that the ransom note may have been written, but was at least left on the stairs, some time after the family had gone to bed that night after returning from a Christmas party, if indeed it was discovered there in the morning as Patsy claimed. Or, in the theoretical case of a coverup, was placed there either by Patsy, in order to deceive John, or by Patsy and John conjointly after JonBenet was accidentally or intentionally killed that morning. But then, in the latter scenario, there would have been no need to stage it sitting on the stairs in the first place, if indeed it ever was left there by someone. So the story of the ransom note, how and where it was found, and by whom and when, is the first major mystery here. Next, there is the question of who actually wrote the so-called ransom note, something fairly extensive handwriting analysis has so far been unable to definitively answer, despite reported marked similarities to Patsy's writing samples submitted to police. Whether a thorough psychological analysis of this ransom note has previously been conducted by a forensic psychologist in this case is unclear to me. But it certainly seems that such an analysis could potentially provide some valuable clues regarding the ransom note's creator(s).


 pages torn from the bedside pad  - -  nope, we all know the pad was from the first floor back hall.

According to her, the strange note was apparently intentionally left on the stairs  - - what a stupid comment.  Someone didn't ACCIDENTLY leave the note there.

Diamond seems to think an intruder would, of course, want to leave the ransom note on the third floor - - take the risk of waking up the adults.  Is Diamond nutz?  The note was placed in a very logical place - - no way would it be missed there.

Diamond wrote, "the ransom note may have been written, but was at least left on the stairs, some time after the family had gone to bed that night after returning from a Christmas party, if indeed it was discovered there in the morning as Patsy claimed."  The BORG has chosen his position - - the rest of his paper will try to convince the reader he is right.  But yes, the note was left on the stirs sometime after the family got home.  When they first got home, if the note was already on those stairs, JOHN would have seen it as he carried JBR up those stairs.    Diamond doesn't think or reason right on this point and many others.

Like this thought - 
"Or, in the theoretical case of a coverup, was placed there either by Patsy, in order to deceive John, or by Patsy and John conjointly after JonBenet was accidentally or intentionally killed that morning. But then, in the latter scenario, there would have been no need to stage it sitting on the stairs in the first place, if indeed it ever was left there by someone. So the story of the ransom note, how and where it was found, and by whom and when, is the first major mystery here."

Lots of words to say nothing, IMO.

Print this item

  John in Miles' lawsuit
Posted by: jameson245 - 08-08-2019, 11:51 AM - Forum: Fleet and Priscilla White - Replies (6)

19 we don't think we've ever been around anybody that could
20 be this evil, period.
21 Q. Do you suspect that Mr. White may have been
22 involved?
23 A. No, no reason to.

Print this item

  from Ramsey interviews
Posted by: jameson245 - 07-29-2019, 08:03 AM - Forum: Flashlight - Replies (1)

22 LOU SMIT: What kind of flashlight do you
23 have?
24 JOHN RAMSEY: Well we've got several, I guess.
25 One that, I believe, came up as an item was this
 1 MAG light flashlight. If it's the one I think it
 2 is, my son gave me that for a Christmas present a
 3 year or two ago. And that was probably in the bar.
 4 The bar drawer was typically where it was kept.
 5 LOU SMIT: You don't remember getting that?
 6 JOHN RAMSEY: No. I know I did not get it.
 7 LOU SMIT: Anyone else get it?
 8 JOHN RAMSEY: Not that I recall. I don't even
 9 know it worked. Typically our flashlights didn't
10 work because we needed new batteries (INAUDIBLE).
11 We might have a few blown flashlights around.

Print this item

  The 5 point scale
Posted by: jameson245 - 07-15-2019, 04:39 PM - Forum: Handwriting - Replies (2)


Print this item

  from Brill's Content
Posted by: jameson245 - 07-13-2019, 11:46 AM - Forum: Pam and Kristine Griffin - Replies (1)

"Thomas allowed Shapiro to sit in on a sensitive investigation.  In July, 1997, me to come to the police station to phone Pam Griffin, a friend of Patsy Ramsey, so that he could surreptitiously tape the conversation.  The detective wanted to document a remarkable assertion that Griffin had made to me:  Patsy Ramsey admitted to her that she wrote the so-called "practice note".  However, said Griffin, Patsy claimed it was just the aborted start to an invitation to some event which Patsy couldn't recall.  Thomas allowed Shapiro to monitor my conversation with Griffin.  The session was a bust, though, when Griffin dismissed her previous comments as "speculation" about Patsy's actions."

Print this item

  caret use indicates college grad
Posted by: jameson245 - 07-07-2019, 04:00 PM - Forum: Disproving Myths - No Replies

In the ransom note, the author wrote that the men watching JonBenet  "do particularly like you" - - then decided to add the word "not".  They put the letter "v" between the first two words and over that wrote "not".   

BORG would have us all believe that the use of a caret proves Patsy wrote the note because only she, a journalism major, would know how to use that caret.  BS - - I was taught how to use a caret - - so was every other public school student who was born in the 50's.  including Patsy.

The interesting thing, IMO, is that I was taught to have the point going to the word to be added, not to the place it was to be put.  

The is what I found online.

[/url]Usage of the Caret Symbol in English Language and Punctuation
If you invert the letter[b] ‘v’[/b] you will obtain a figure like this[b] ‘^’ [/b]which is called as the caret symbol. [b]‘Caret’[/b] is a word from Latin and it literally means[i] ‘to lack something; or to be separated.’[/i] The word is pronounced exactly the way we pronounce the word [b]‘carrot’ [/b]regularly. This peculiar [url=http://www.writeawriting.com/grammar/irony-sarcasm-punctuation-english-language/]character
is extensively found on every keyboard in our contemporary world, but, have you wondered what the use of this caret symbol is?
Well, let’s find out today!
How to Use the Caret Symbol in English Language?
For Proofreading
Initially, this mark originated to be a symbol for proofreaders who wanted to point out mistakes in a text by inserting this mark within the space between the words and insert the particular word or punctuation that was felt needed. For instance, The Sentence
[i]“My father holding the camera, when the light suddenly went out”[/i] will be corrected by a proof reader as follows:
[i]“My father ^was holding the camera, when the light suddenly went out.”[/i]
Thus, if you want to [b]insert something in your text[/b], you can easily utilize this figure within your writing.

The ransom note has the caret upside down.  So much for the BORG evidence against Patsy on that count.

Print this item