Found on Facebook
[/url]This guy seems pretty smart - and may not last long on the Facebook forums that don't seem to care if lies stand unchallenged.

Tom Gavin
New Member · July 25 at 11:13 PM

Bob Russell, Former District Attorney in Colorado Springs:
"The evidence was too strong that the Ramseys didn't do this. And so, to see that anybody's trying to really get the Ramsey's indicted, when I had already seen the evidence that showed he Ramseys most certainly didn't do it, it really bothered me...even though I've been a Prosecutor all my life."
After Lou Smit was allowed to keep his evidence, that pointed to an Intruder (The Boulder Special Prosecutoe Michael Kane sought an injunction against Lou Smit and his evidence) the Grand Jury still heard evidence dominated by the Police view of Ramsey guilt.
Former Public Defender Greg Walta in 1998:
"I think the case is in deep trouble. And I think it's in deep trouble because the Boulder Police Dept. has really staked its reputation on the Ramseys being guilty. and once that's happened, that Police Dept. can no longer perform its' chief function. And I think the Boulder PD is virtually incapable of solving this case."
And he was right. Here we are 20 yrs later. Case has been unsolved and virtually frozen. And 20 yrs later, Walta states that JonBenet's killer is one of the "scariest people on earth." Totally convinced of Ramsey innocence.
As is one of the first Detectives on the scene, Robert Whitson. He also believes the family is innocent. He WAS IN THE HOUSE with the family the morning of the 26th.
"I was not part of the ongoing investigation, but Detectives that were working the case told me the Ramseys were the ONLY prime suspects." Imagine that[Image: 1f644.png]?
He is now a Criminologist and says he understands now why the Boulder PD focused on the Ramsey's....which they most certainly did, despite what misinformation you hear on these boards. "The Boulder PD formed a Groupthink mentality. Everybody has to think the same thing and anybody who disagrees with that primary hypothesis is excluded from the group."
But what happened in Boulder happens in many cases. A rush to blame the parents. There is leaking of information, a public sentiment that the parents must have had something to do with it.
John Ramsey says it best: "We absolutely felt we were the victim of a lynch mob, led by the Boulder Police and supported by the media." (and further strengthened by an often harsh and judgmental public).
"Dr. Lucy Rorke-Adams, a neuro-pathologist with the Philadelphia Children’s Hospital, helped explain the timing of some of the injuries sustained by JonBenét. She told investigators that the blow to the skull had immediately begun to hemorrhage, and it was not likely that she would have regained consciousness after receiving this injury. The blow to the head, if left untreated, would have been fatal.

The presence of cerebral edema, swelling of the brain, suggested that JonBenét had survived for some period of time after receiving the blow to her head. Blood from the injury slowly began to fill the cavity of the skull and began to build up pressure on her brain. As pressure increased, swelling was causing the medulla of the brain to push through the foramen magnum, the narrow opening at the base of the skull.

Dr. Rorke estimated that it would have taken an hour or so for the cerebral edema to develop, but that this swelling had not yet caused JonBenét’s death. “Necrosis,” neurological changes to the brain cells, indicated a period of survival after the blow that could have ranged from between forty-five (45) minutes and two (2) hours.

As pressure in her skull increased, JonBenét was beginning to experience the effects of “brain death.” Her neurological and biological systems were beginning to shut down, and she may have been exhibiting signs of cheyne-stokes breathing. These are short, gasping breaths that may be present as the body struggles to satisfy its need for oxygen in the final stages of death."
Chapter 6: Interpreting the Injuries
Foreign Faction: Who really kidnpped JonBenét?
Note: Dr. Lucy Rorke - Adams was one of notable experts who testified in the GJ hearing in 1999


The lack of blood found in the skull discredits this doctor's findings.
Chris Headquarters That touch DNA is not enough to exclude or include anybody from suspicion.

My response:
The touch DNA is, I agree, NOT enough to exclude anyone. What the touch DNA did was verify the importance of the DNA that was co-mingled with JonBenet's blood in her panties - the result of the sexual assault that took place on that night. The BORG had done all they could to question the importance of the DNA in her panties - - suggesting it came from the factory. Impossible since the DNA was mixed with her blood but NOT found on the fabric between the blood drops. The same DNA profile, found years later, on another article of clothing, by a different lab - - THAT was important.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)