A few minor errors
#1
Reading the book, I found a few minor errors in the Ramsey chapters and will mention them here.  Overall, I thought the book was very interesting but wished he had gone further into the false witnesses involved in this case - namely Vassar Professor Don Foster and Seraph's Dale Yeager.

OK, so the minor issues.

Right off he describes the crime and says Linda Arndt asked John Ramsey to search the house - - then she says it was 30 minutes before the body was found.  I don't know exactly how long it took, but hearing John and Fleet describe that search, I would think it was more like 5 to 10 minutes.

Also said that in the early days, the DNA found in her panties was "unsuitable for DNA analysis" - and that is not true.  I have copies of the DNA reports from days after the murder - - and several people were cleared immediately based on the DNA found mixed with the blood of JonBenet - in her panties, left from the sexual assault.

He had a couple things that I can't say I know or do not know to be true.  But for the most part, he had stuff pretty well figured out.

He didn't really bring anything new to my attention but had a few stories that I had not heard before - I was entertained and think most would be by his small anecdotes.
Reply
#2
Jams,

On Amazon at:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-revie...hisHelpful

the reviewer We Are Legion has this to say:

Quote:We Are Legion

Ramsey chapters are poorly researched and lack objectivity

January 14, 2009

<snip>

It is a shame that Fisher relied on Lou Smit for his case evidence as it is woefully outdated. It almost seems like Fisher wrote the Ramsey chapters years ago before more factual evidence became public. On p. 194, Fisher states in his book: "Lou Smit had made a credible case for an intrusion, which included an unidentified crime-scene pubic hair, a mysterious boot impression, an unidentified palm print, marks made on the corpse that could have been made by a stun gun, and broken basement window."

Apparently, Fisher does not know (as many Ramsey case followers do) that the unidentified hair was sourced to a female Paugh relative (and that it wasn't a pubic hair), the boot impression was only a half impression, and it matched the Hi-Tecs worn by Burke Ramsey, the unidentified palm print was sourced to Melinda Ramsey, the marks on JonBenet were not made by a stun gun as they were described by the Medical Examiner as abrasions, and John Ramsey, himself, said he broke the basement window.

<snip>
Reply
#3
Legion is either a liar or just another misinformed BORG poster who believes the garbage posted on some BORG sites. Legion needs to spend time on the depositions, interview transcripts, court decisions, search warrants, etc.

The prints (hand and boot) remain unsourced, as does the handwriting and DNA. The hair did not belong to Melinda and there is NO reason to believe Dr. Doberson - an expert in stun gun injuries - is wrong when he says he will testify that the marks were, "to a medical certainty" made by a stun gun.

As far as the broken window, just because the window was broken earlier did not mean it couldn't have been used by an intruder that night.

But he was right, there are some mistakes in the book - - another one is that Fisher writes Alex Hunter disbanded the grand jury and they were not given the opportunity to vote. We all know that is wrong.
Reply
#4
Hi Jams,

Thanks for your response.  I had thought this was BS but wasn't sure about all of it.  There were two responses to Legion's "review" that were very supportive of it.  It's just unbelievable how misled and uninformed people are and have been about this case. 

I had thought that the Italian authorities and citizenry had proven themselves to be a bunch of buffoons in the Amanda Knox case which was clearly a sexual homicide by (almost certainly) an individual, but with the Ramsey case, we are proving to be their equal.  Unfortunately, these are not mere comedies, but real tragedies in the lives of real people.
Reply
#5
The gossip spread and reporters did not double check the information and that made this a much bigger mess than it ever should have been. Nancy Grace, Peter Boyles and others should have been sued early on for that but were not and I think journalists really should be held to a higher standard than that.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)