02-05-2021, 01:21 AM
JonBenet Ramsey and a Foreign Faction
LIKE THIS BLOG
By Marcel Elfers
Posted Aug 24, 2012 in Crime
Comments
Share
[color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.8)]
JonBenét Ramsey died on December 25th, 1996. A two and a half page ransom note was found and Patsy Ramsey called 911 at 5:52 am. You can listen to the call here. Patsy prioritized "address", “a note” and “a kidnapping” above her daughter being "gone". She never demanded nor asked for assistance but replied "please" on the suggestion help was on the way. That is not just odd, it reveals a perspective of the caller. The 911 call is considered deceptive.
For a long time the intruder theory believers have been citing DNA evidence in the case. Unidentified male “touch DNA” had been found on her clothing. The District Attorney’s office explains what touch DNA is in the exoneration letter of 2008. You scrape clothing and find some cells that you further develop into a DNA profile and since it is unidentified, it must have been an intruder.
[/color]
James Kolar wrote a respectable account in his book “Foreign Faction.” Kolar was assigned lead detective to the Ramsey case in 2005. He had access to all investigative files and explains the touch DNA.
For DA Mary Lacy to exonerate the Ramseys was the right thing to do as the Ramseys suffered long enough. From an investigative perspective, the DNA evidence does not hold up to minimal scrutiny.
Touch DNA is DNA left behind when you touch something. According to Kolar, the FBI sampled off the shelf and packaged clothing for DNA and found DNA on never worn clothing as well. Apparently, handling of clothing leaves DNA behind and is not necessarily from someone who was in contact with JonBenét.
According to Kolar, DNA from another four males and one female was also found. There is no mention of other DNA found in her letter and there sure is an innocent explanation for the DNA to be present.
The key evidence for exoneration is this touch DNA, yet, if it is assumed to be from one intruder who was in contact with JonBenét, then another five intruders must have been in contact with her as well. It is impossible to explain why one intruder, let alone a group of intruders, can be in the house, go unnoticed and leave no evidence of their presence behind other than some touch DNA.
It appears the DA office and John Ramsey both know this very well.
Mary Lacy writes it will take more than DNA to solve what happened that night. Her word selection “your family was not responsible” is curious as this does not exclude involvement. When I am rear ended and my car slides forward breaking the leg of a pedestrian, I am involved, but not responsible. Is the DA office maybe aware that an accident happened that night?
John Ramsey is aware of that detail as well. In his 2008 interview with Oprah Winfrey, he answered the question “what do you think about the exoneration?” with “it is going in the right direction.” With this answer he explains to the world he knows it is not over.
I am writing a book titled “The principle of lying is telling the truth, just not the whole truth.” In this book the reader is taken on a forensic journey through handwriting and textual analysis.
The ransom note was signed as follows:
In my case study I will present a plausible theory an accident happened that night and reveal that S.B.T.C [sic] is the logical conclusion of the ransom note.
Kolar wrote a book worth reading. May Patsy rest in peace and may John find happiness in his new marriage.
Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/blog/18127#ixzz6lYVfyjI6
LIKE THIS BLOG
By Marcel Elfers
Posted Aug 24, 2012 in Crime
Comments
Share
[color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.8)]
JonBenét Ramsey died on December 25th, 1996. A two and a half page ransom note was found and Patsy Ramsey called 911 at 5:52 am. You can listen to the call here. Patsy prioritized "address", “a note” and “a kidnapping” above her daughter being "gone". She never demanded nor asked for assistance but replied "please" on the suggestion help was on the way. That is not just odd, it reveals a perspective of the caller. The 911 call is considered deceptive.
For a long time the intruder theory believers have been citing DNA evidence in the case. Unidentified male “touch DNA” had been found on her clothing. The District Attorney’s office explains what touch DNA is in the exoneration letter of 2008. You scrape clothing and find some cells that you further develop into a DNA profile and since it is unidentified, it must have been an intruder.
[/color]
James Kolar wrote a respectable account in his book “Foreign Faction.” Kolar was assigned lead detective to the Ramsey case in 2005. He had access to all investigative files and explains the touch DNA.
For DA Mary Lacy to exonerate the Ramseys was the right thing to do as the Ramseys suffered long enough. From an investigative perspective, the DNA evidence does not hold up to minimal scrutiny.
Touch DNA is DNA left behind when you touch something. According to Kolar, the FBI sampled off the shelf and packaged clothing for DNA and found DNA on never worn clothing as well. Apparently, handling of clothing leaves DNA behind and is not necessarily from someone who was in contact with JonBenét.
According to Kolar, DNA from another four males and one female was also found. There is no mention of other DNA found in her letter and there sure is an innocent explanation for the DNA to be present.
The key evidence for exoneration is this touch DNA, yet, if it is assumed to be from one intruder who was in contact with JonBenét, then another five intruders must have been in contact with her as well. It is impossible to explain why one intruder, let alone a group of intruders, can be in the house, go unnoticed and leave no evidence of their presence behind other than some touch DNA.
It appears the DA office and John Ramsey both know this very well.
Mary Lacy writes it will take more than DNA to solve what happened that night. Her word selection “your family was not responsible” is curious as this does not exclude involvement. When I am rear ended and my car slides forward breaking the leg of a pedestrian, I am involved, but not responsible. Is the DA office maybe aware that an accident happened that night?
John Ramsey is aware of that detail as well. In his 2008 interview with Oprah Winfrey, he answered the question “what do you think about the exoneration?” with “it is going in the right direction.” With this answer he explains to the world he knows it is not over.
I am writing a book titled “The principle of lying is telling the truth, just not the whole truth.” In this book the reader is taken on a forensic journey through handwriting and textual analysis.
The ransom note was signed as follows:
In my case study I will present a plausible theory an accident happened that night and reveal that S.B.T.C [sic] is the logical conclusion of the ransom note.
Kolar wrote a book worth reading. May Patsy rest in peace and may John find happiness in his new marriage.
Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/blog/18127#ixzz6lYVfyjI6