re Debunking the Seven Pieces of "Evidence" That "Prove" the Intruder Theory.

forumsfor"justice" has a thread

re Debunking the Seven Pieces of "Evidence" That "Prove" the Intruder Theory.
by Dunvegan's Avatar
Dunvegan
Dunvegan is offline Founder

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?1707-Debunking-the-Seven-Pieces-of-quot-Evidence-quot-That-quot-Prove-quot-the-Intruder-Theory

he and Tricia are founders of this site,
but it is clear neither have any background

1. DNA evidence. Foreign DNA was found under JonBenet's fingernails. some prosecutors have described this evidence as a "problem." I look at it as a huge clue, and I'm grateful we have it. If JonBenet fought with her killer, she may have given us his DNA, which will ultimately be his downfall. In addition, the DNA from the stain found on JonBenet's underwear cannot be identified. The police have these test results, and we can only hope that they are checking all possible suspects against this generic fingerprint. Our belief is that this DNA belongs to the killer.

According to Dr. Henry Lee, and Barry Scheck, the Ramsey murder case is categorically not a DNA case. The DNA in question is "degraded"…not complete…not admissible as an identifier.

According to Lawrence Kobilinsky, and  Richard Eikelenboom two DNA experts who had personally reviewed the latest DNA finding, this is most emphatically a DNA case.

Henry Lee's analysis is seriously flawed as in his CBS paid for sham, he never explains how if the DNA on the panties was from a factory worker, it also was found on a separate piece of clothing, and more important this represents a better explanation.

2. The cord and the duct tape. The police thoroughly attempted to find more of these two items in our house, without success. Because we think the killer carefully planned what was to be a kidnapping, it is our belief that he brought the cord and duct tape with him, knowing that he couldn't count on finding similar material in our house. After the crime, the police checked through all the ashes in our fireplace in the living room, even removing the bottom of the fireplace and checking the bin beneath it in an effort to make sure that we or someone else hadn't attempted to dispose of any cord or tape in our fireplace. They found nothing.

The police found nothing. It is a logical fallicy to attempt to prove a negative.

that's not the point. not finding a source from within the Ramsey home of a used tape roll and ligature leads to the inference that an intruder came in and brought those items.

there have been other instances of intruder sexual predators who enter homes with tape and ligature.

 3. The pubic hair found on JonBenet's blanket. We have been lead to believe this hair doesn't match anyone in the family or anyone whom we know who may have ever slept on JonBenet's bed. The Boulder police have this evidence, and only they are in a position to do further testing. Obviously, it is a highly significant piece of evidence. If there is DNA in the pubic hair, does it match that found on JonBenet's clothing and under her fingernails.

The hair has been identified as belonging to Patsy Ramsey.

official source please

#4 skip for now

5. The stun gun. We believe the stun gun was manufactured by Air Taser. This manufacturer requires the purchaser to register his name, and the police should have obtained a list of all the buyers. How many people do you know who won a stun gun? None? It's not a commonly owned device.

There has never been any proof whatsoever that a stun gun was used in the commission of the murder of JonBenet Ramsey. Most reliable evidence points to the contrary.

However, it is true that John Ramsey refused when he was asked if he would be willing to exhume JonBenet's body to check for several small marks which only the Ramseys and Lou Smit have said could possibly have been administered by a stun gun.

the interpretation of the abrasions noted on autopsy can only be determined by the relevant expert. in this case a forensic pathologist

Dr. Leon Kelly is a forensic pathologist and he says that the abrasions were consistent with a stun gun

there is no forensic scientific merit to the claim that since it cannot be proved it was from a stun gun, therefore no stun gun was used

Dunvegan is most clearly not a forensic pathologist

6.The palmprint. A palm print was found on the cellar door where I found JonBenet. We know the print did not match Patsy's or my palmprints and remains unidentified, as far as we know. It is still possible that this print could match someone who had a reasonable explanation for being in the basement and mean nothing. At the same time, it could be an important clue.

The palmprint means nothing. It has been identified as belonging to Melinda Ramsey.

source?

7.The footprint by JonBenet's body. In the basement room where I found JonBenet, a fungus like mildew grew on the floors and walls due to the moist climate of the room. This room had no windows and was concrete on four sides and on the ceiling. Next to JonBenet's body the killer, I believe, left a clear footprint made by the sole of a Hi-Tec hiking shoe, from the area at the heel where the brand name was stamped. The markings are clear and should further help identify the killer.

The Hi-Tec footprint has been identified as belonging to Burke Ramsey.

source? Several recent documentaries from Aphrodite Jones to A&E and Investigative Discovery all state this Hi-Tec footprint was from an adult male, Burke was age 9, and not matched, it was recent and near Jonbenet's body. these documentaries were aired in 2016, and there was no suggestion in these researched documentaries that the shoeprint was sourced to Burke.

the inference is that the intruder was wearing Hi-tec footprint

when I say source,

this episode of Forensic Files goes into detail what are the expectations that go into shoe print identification




Dunvegan conspicuously fails to mention the multiple sources of trace evidence, fiber, hair, animal hair that was also found at the crime scene, which alone and taken together, strongly supports the intruder explanation


forumsforjustice forum members demonstrate  pure ignorance

In the minds of those posters at forumforjustice anything that points to an intruder has to be not real evidence. They believe that Burke, Patsy, and John are good for this crime that any evidence that points to an intruder has to be denied. If this evidence pointed to the Ramsey's the posters would be validating it like crazy.

MurderMysteryReader wrote:In the minds of those posters at forumforjustice anything that points to an intruder has to be not real evidence. They believe that Burke, Patsy, and John are good for this crime that any evidence that points to an intruder has to be denied. If this evidence pointed to the Ramsey's the posters would be validating it like crazy.

yeah it's deeply unethical, and unscientific.

they call themselves forumforjustice but really they're just a lynch mob

I agree. They are out to get the Ramsey's no matter what. The RDI think they are judge and jury and they would no doubt carry out the sentence if that were possible.