JonBenet Ramsey and Jennifer Schuett intruder attack actual forensic science in action

Wed Jun 20, 2018

let's review the claims of RDI science denialist


trasha pictured below is an example of an anti-science denialist




this is what she claims

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?76520-Patsy-Ramsey/page92

tricia griffith wrote:
Anti-K, this whole forum has example after example after example that an intruder did not commit this crime.

No one can show one scintilla of evidence of an intruder.

As owner, I do my best to stay out of actual discussions about a crime.

The JBR case is the one expection.

Websleuths is a leader in true crime information as well as discussion. People come here to get information. It is imperative we deal with the facts. Not fantasy.

All I ask for are facts and a logical connecting of the dots. Logic and facts.

When I get time I will be going through the forum to make sure the JonBenet Ramsey forum is being held up to the high standards just like all our other forums on Websleuths.

The days of allowing anyone to post anything because it's part of their "theory" are gone. Facts and logic. Very simple.

this is her qualifications

Host Tricia Griffith is a veteran radio disc jockey and owner of Websleuths.com and owner of Forums for Justice.org.

in other words she has ZERO qualifications in forensic science. she has no training in forensic fiber, trace evidence, DNA yet she claims

tricia griffith wrote:
Anti-K, this whole forum has example after example after example that an intruder did not commit this crime.

No one can show one scintilla of evidence of an intruder.

similarly with Delmar England

delmar england wrote:
Letter to Boulder Colorado District Attorney, Mary Keenan

The crime scene consisted of an obviously bogus multi-page "ransom note" utilizing local materials. JonBenet's body was left in the basement of the Ramsey home with crude trappings falling woefully short of presenting a convincing kidnap\murder scene as it was intended to do. Even without pointing out more of a very long list of corroborating facts, the bogus note and inept staging is more than sufficient to isolate the perpetrators to the Ramsey household. Only a few minutes in examining and evaluating the evidence is required to reach this conclusion. It is impossible to reach any other conclusion on the facts. There was and is no evidentiary reason to look anywhere else. The only mystery to be solved was and is which Ramsey did what in relation to JonBenet's death.

Although it is not possible to reach any other conclusion from the evidence, it is possible to ignore the evidence and mentally invent "evidence" to take the place of truth and keep it hidden. Prompted by preconceived notions set in a context of money and political influence in conjunction with investigative cowardice and incompetence, this is precisely what has been going on for over six years.

delmar wrote:
Handwriting? Patsy has not been ruled out by several examiners. By my own analysis, not of the writing, but of the mind match between the note and Patsy is clear. This is explained in my analysis of the "ransom note." So far, neither you nor anyone else has quoted and challenged it. So, to say the handwriting does not match the Ramseys, thus all Ramseys are excluded as author, is just another arbitrary declaration without substance. Note the exclusion of Ramseys necessarily depends on the intruder idea of no factual substance.

DNA? So, it does not match the family. So what? Who does it match? Unknown? If unknown, how can it be known to connect to the crime and be "evidence?" If the source of this DNA were known, then factually connected to the crime scene, then it is evidence. Absence this, it is just more speculation that caters to intruder mental creation.

Does the DNA have to be connected to the crime? Could it not be from a benign source totally removed from the crime scene? Again, the alleged evidence evidences nothing except itself with no known connection to the crime. No outsider as perpetrator is required to explain the DNA since no connection is known as crime related.

The same is true for boot print, hairs, fibers, etc.. A close look into anyone's house would most likely turn up all sorts of things whose source were unknown whether there is a crime or not. To call something whose source and cause is unknown as evidence is to say it causal related while simultaneously saying cause is unknown, thus relationship unknown; more "negative evidence." If my recollection of high school Latin is correct, this could be called "ignotium per ignotius", the unknown by the more unknown.

This "Ramsey defense" "thinking" is a direct and absurd contradiction that is without limit. With this kind of "investigative latitude", I dare say that one could "prove" anything; or at least, convince the deluded self that he or she has done so. "negative evidence?" Surely, thou jest. I repeat: All known evidence is local.

delmar england wrote:
For every "could be", there is a "could be not", therefore, inconclusive until cause is known. Right? No thing is evidence until evidentiary cause is known. Right? Are we in agreement so far? If not, please point out what you think is my error in thinking, and why you think it is error.

A shoe print is found in the basement whose cause is unknown. It "could be" evidence of an intruder. "Could be not" is forgotten and "evidence" of an intruder is declared to be fact. There is a palm print with cause unknown; a rope with source unknown that "could be" something brought in by an intruder; an unidentified fiber, a baseball bat that "could have" been used by the intruder; a bit of dirt or leaves at a window well which "could have" been disturbed by an intruder. The list goes on and on and on.

This massive "evidence" stated to be more consistent with a theory of intruder than Ramsey guilt is hot air, nothing more than a string of unknowns verbally laced together on "could be", simultaneously divorced from the known, and declared to be much evidence of an intruder. Ridiculous to the max. No wonder no one will step forward and answer questions about alleged evidence of an alleged intruder. Its indefensible.

The beauty of truth is that it is consistent. Every fact is a complement of and blends with every other fact without contradiction. The presence of a contradiction is also the presence of error. Are we in agreement up to this point?

the contention of the RDI forensic failures and flunkies is there is no evidence of an intruder.

the criterion of justice is to use science in the investigation

science is based on observation, and using the same scientific objective standard in every case.

this is Jennifer Schuett eight



by comparison JonBenet Ramsey age 6



when tricia griffith says

tricia griffith wrote:
Anti-K, this whole forum has example after example after example that an intruder did not commit this crime.

No one can show one scintilla of evidence of an intruder.

and delmar england

The same is true for boot print, hairs, fibers, etc.. A close look into anyone's house would most likely turn up all sorts of things whose source were unknown whether there is a crime or not. To call something whose source and cause is unknown as evidence is to say it causal related while simultaneously saying cause is unknown, thus relationship unknown; more "negative evidence." If my recollection of high school Latin is correct, this could be called "ignotium per ignotius", the unknown by the more unknown.

This "Ramsey defense" "thinking" is a direct and absurd contradiction that is without limit. With this kind of "investigative latitude", I dare say that one could "prove" anything; or at least, convince the deluded self that he or she has done so. "negative evidence?" Surely, thou jest. I repeat: All known evidence is local

are these statements based on observation and expert witness testimony?

this is what happened to  Jennifer Schuett

A woman who was kidnapped and raped as a child has spoken of the horrific night she was snatched from her bedroom and how she tried to help police find her attacker by scribbling notes from her hospital bed.

Jennifer Schuett was only eight years old when she was abducted by a stranger from her home in Dickinson, Texas in August 1990 before being strangled and violently raped.

The little girl's attacker, Dennis Earl Bradford, slit her throat and left her for dead in a field where she laid naked, bleeding and unable to move until children found her some 14 hours later.

Jennifer Schuett was only eight years old when she was abducted by a stranger from her home in Dickinson, Texas in August 1990 before being strangled and violently raped

Schuett miraculously managed to fall pregnant via IVF in 2012 despite doctors telling her she unlikely to ever conceive given her severe rape injures. She now has two children - Jenna, 4, and 11-month-old Jonah - with husband Jonathan Martinez

'He held a knife to my throat and said: 'Am I scaring you, little girl? Am I scaring you?' Then he choked me as hard as he could. I blacked out for a while,' Schuett told the program.  

'I woke up to him dragging me by my ankles. He dropped my legs. I realized I couldn't scream and I couldn't figure out why. I had just enough strength to throw my right hand on top of my neck. That's when I felt this gaping wound.'

When Schuett woke up in the field her attacker was gone, but she couldn't move or even scream for help. She was rescued hours later after children playing in the field found her.

Despite being unable to speak as she recovered in hospital from her horrific injuries, Schuett desperately tried to answer police questions about the man who attacked her.

She wrote that she had been wearing a 'pink t-shirt' and white underwear covered in blue roses on the night she was abducted.

The little girl told police her attacker's name was Dennis and helped police create a sketch of the suspect with her detailed description.

She wrote the man was white, wore glasses, had a black mustache and had one or two green tattoos.

'I remember writing down that there were beer cans, the brand of cigarettes that he had, everything that I thought would help in finding him,' Schuett said.

In one of the notes, she told police Bradford said he was 'an undercover cop. Big gun. He said I don't have my gun or badge right now.'

Despite the details she provided detectives, two decades passed before improved DNA testing linked Bradford to the attack.

ref http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4304096/Child-kidnap-victim-speaks-night-raped-Texas.html

let's review what happened to  Jennifer Schuett  age 8





Jennifer Schuett was only eight years old when she was abducted by a stranger from her home in Dickinson, Texas in August 1990 before being strangled and violently raped.


her own words

Jennifer: My name is Jennifer Schuett. I’m a survivor of a violent crime and victim advocate. In August of 1990, on August the 10th, I went to sleep in my mother’s bed as I usually would have. In the middle of the night, she woke me up and asked me to go sleep in my own room. I’ve never slept in my own bed before, and I went in there and got out my piggy bank and some books and started to count the change in my piggy bank as I fell asleep.

Soon after, I awoke in the arms of a strange man who I did not know. His hands covered my nose and mouth and he calmed me down by telling me he was an undercover police officer. He placed me in his vehicle and we started to drive through town, passing my grandparent’s house, and ending up in the parking lot of my elementary school.

We were still on summer break. I had just finished my second grade year, so I was getting ready to start my third grade year at Silvernagel Elementary in Dickinson. The school is maybe two miles from where my apartment complex was located.

We were there in the parking lot and he offered me candy, which I refused, as I learned in school to not take candy from strangers. But also, I’d learned that law enforcement could be trusted, so I kinda felt like I was being pulled in two different directions. But, my gut was telling me there something just wasn’t right about this entire situation. My mother wasn’t one that would go out and party or even hang out with friends, so I’d never been watched by anyone except for grandparents.

He told me that my mom was going to pull into the parking lot to pick me up soon, and she never came. He started up his vehicle about five minutes after he told me that, but it seemed like it was forever, and he drove me about a mile past my school to an overgrown lot off of a short gravel road, and it was there that I started to question him being a police officer.

I was a very curious eight year-old little girl, and would ask a lot of questions. So, I started to ask him, “If you’re a police officer, where’s your gun? Where’s your badge? You know, prove this to me.” At one point he told me that his gun was in the backseat. So, I stood up on the front bucket seat of the car to look into the back, and whenever I did that to see where the gun was located, he ripped my panties off of me. He then laid me down in the front seat of the vehicle, climbed on top of me, and started to lick me all over my body. There are times when I black out either from him either choking me or trying to break my neck. The next thing I remember is waking up and him dragging me through a field by my ankles. So I could feel sticks poking me in the back, thorns, but I just stayed silent, and played dead at one point, not even realizing that during one of those times that I had blacked out, he had actually slit my throat from ear to ear. He laid me in a fire pile soon after that and left.

I laid in the field for 12-14 hours – we don’t know the exact time that I was kidnapped, so we can only estimate it was about 12-14 hours after the attack occurred. I was found by a group of children playing tag in this field and was life-flighted to John Sealy Hospital, which is part of the University of Texas Medical Branch on Galveston Island, and I stayed there for two weeks being treated for a lacerated throat and trachea.

While in the hospital, doctors said that I would never be able to speak again due to the damage done to my throat, and just being determined, and passionate and wanting this person caught, I believe I was given my voice back for a reason, I now travel and share my story, and did so for almost 20 years, as my case was a cold case. It was finally solved in 2009 on October the 13th when an arrest was made in North Little Rock, Arkansas.

a home invading intruder entered her home and abducted her, strangled her, and slit her throat, but amazingly she survived.

this is a home intruder case on a 8 year old white female




evidence?

Detectives had no leads until Dennis Earl Bradford was finally found in 2009 after improved DNA testing linked him to the attack

where was it found?

cnn wrote:. Advanced DNA tests provided a break in the case; DNA was in clothing.

more details

Specifically, some clothing that was Jennifer's clothing and some men's ... So we started to focus on that and we sent that off to the DNA lab with the FBI out

ref

let's review RDI lies

trasha pictured below is an example of an anti-science denialist




similarly

this is her qualifications

Host Tricia Griffith is a veteran radio disc jockey and owner of Websleuths.com and owner of Forums for Justice.org.

in other words she has ZERO qualifications in forensic science. she has no training in forensic fiber, trace evidence, DNA yet she claims

tricia griffith wrote:
Anti-K, this whole forum has example after example after example that an intruder did not commit this crime.

No one can show one scintilla of evidence of an intruder.

and

and delmar england

The same is true for boot print, hairs, fibers, etc.. A close look into anyone's house would most likely turn up all sorts of things whose source were unknown whether there is a crime or not. To call something whose source and cause is unknown as evidence is to say it causal related while simultaneously saying cause is unknown, thus relationship unknown; more "negative evidence." If my recollection of high school Latin is correct, this could be called "ignotium per ignotius", the unknown by the more unknown.

This "Ramsey defense" "thinking" is a direct and absurd contradiction that is without limit. With this kind of "investigative latitude", I dare say that one could "prove" anything; or at least, convince the deluded self that he or she has done so. "negative evidence?" Surely, thou jest. I repeat: All known evidence is local

are these claims true if  would you apply these to other home intruder crimes?

like this one?

On August 10, 1990, Schuett was kidnapped from her bedroom window. She was taken to a nearby field where she was raped and her throat slit. She was found 14 hours later.

Chief Morales says despite the victim's persistence there were few leads in the case until a year and a half ago. That's when officers sent several pieces of clothing found near Schuett to the FBI for DNA analysis.

ref http://abc13.com/archive/7064746/

it took 19 years and advances in touch DNA when they were able to test several pieces of clothing near where the victim was found.

they found DNA, this DNA matched Dennis Bradford



it took 19 years.

in those 19 years are RDI prepared to state that the DNA found on clothing near where the victim was found is not evidence of anything?

is that justice?

this is tricia griffith




this is her claim

tricia griffith wrote:
Anti-K, this whole forum has example after example after example that an intruder did not commit this crime.

No one can show one scintilla of evidence of an intruder.

she uses her websleuth and forumsforjustice forums to claim DNA fiber shoeprint ligature tape are not evidence of an intruder.

she is lying. she is deceiving. she is ignorant.

to recap

this is  Jennifer Schuett  age 8

she was victim of a home intruder crime, an intruder entered her home, removed her from the home, removed her clothes and raped and strangled her.

how does this compare to Jonbenet?

he removed her clothes.

it took 19 years for DNA technology to advance by forensic scientists were able to find DNA on that clothes.

what is the forensic value of that DNA on her clothes?

it was matched to Dennis Bradford

would RDI claims made on the Jonbenet Ramsey DNA on clothing

tricia griffith




this is her claim

tricia griffith wrote:
Anti-K, this whole forum has example after example after example that an intruder did not commit this crime.

No one can show one scintilla of evidence of an intruder.

and delmar england whom forusmforjustice posers like cynic and tricia priase

The same is true for boot print, hairs, fibers, etc.. A close look into anyone's house would most likely turn up all sorts of things whose source were unknown whether there is a crime or not. To call something whose source and cause is unknown as evidence is to say it causal related while simultaneously saying cause is unknown, thus relationship unknown; more "negative evidence." If my recollection of high school Latin is correct, this could be called "ignotium per ignotius", the unknown by the more unknown.

This "Ramsey defense" "thinking" is a direct and absurd contradiction that is without limit. With this kind of "investigative latitude", I dare say that one could "prove" anything; or at least, convince the deluded self that he or she has done so. "negative evidence?" Surely, thou jest. I repeat: All known evidence is local

result in the scientifically correct conclusion regarding DNA found on Jennifer Schuett?

you do realize at the moment they found DNA on the clothing of Jennifer Schuett, you could say "A close look into anyone's house would most likely turn up all sorts of things whose source were unknown whether there is a crime or not. To call something whose source and cause is unknown as evidence is to say it causal related while simultaneously saying cause is unknown, thus relationship unknown; more "negative evidence." If my recollection of high school Latin is correct, this could be called "ignotium per ignotius", the unknown by the more unknown."

and

"
This "Ramsey defense" "thinking" is a direct and absurd contradiction that is without limit. With this kind of "investigative latitude", I dare say that one could "prove" anything; or at least, convince the deluded self that he or she has done so. "negative evidence?" Surely, thou jest. I repeat: All known evidence is local"

it remains a basic fact of the case the DNA is NOT local, and that the tape fibers ligature shoe print were never matched to anyone

Delmar Englad is a fraud a complete and total fraud and the fact forumsforjustice embrace this fraud tells you they have never studied forensic science.

in each and every crime scene they may find trace evidence like fiber DNA hair shoe print, at initially the cause may be unknown, so the purpose of forensic science is to develop hypothesis to explain the said evidence.


imagine Jennifer Schuett age 8 had actually died from her injuries



which almost happened. it was a miracle she survived her attack.

and the only evidence they found was that DNA on clothing found strewn about nearby, and that DNA did not match her family.

would you be prepared to say therefore her parents murdered  Jennifer Schuett and there was no intruder and the DNA has no forensic evidence of an intruder?

that they only found 1 DNA profile on 1 article of clothing Jennifer Schuett case which could come from a factory worker. does this mean the
there's no evidence of an intruder?

that is essentially what RDI are doing on the Jonbenet Ramsey case.

tricia griffith




has never studied forensic science, is not truthfully representing the conclusion of forensic scientists as the value of the forensic evidence, and instead using her influence on forumsforjustice and websleuth to spread lies and misinformation

tricia griffith

forumsforjustice and websleuth are not truthfully representing scientific expert witness on the actual scientific value of the forensic evidence

the DNA ransom note, fibers hair ligature injuries are all evidence of an intruder.

I can’t post the link to the table I built for seven days. But if you go to the JBRCE attached to the JonBenet subs at reddit, and then look for _dnaWaistbandsamples in the files, it’s a pdf and you will see my table.

I’m glad I found your blog today. I mean I know I’m late to the party in terms of commenting, but I had to prove to myself the dna was true. And I did it with this spreadsheet. It’s just a translation of the Bode Lab Report pertaining to the dna waistband samples. But I did the math. And while I have posted it at reddit, I’m not very popular. A looney tune. But I’m from Boulder, and I believe someone else was in the house that night. And maybe another. Isn’t that what the ransom note says?

hi and welcome.

What brings you here?

yes i believe an intruder murdered Jonbenet Ramsey.

Well, I have just found myself immersed in the JBR case lately. I’m hoping ancestry dna might lead to a suspect. I think SBTC might stand for Eastern Religions... Shambhala, Buddhism (Bon), Taoism, Confucianism. I’m grossing myself out reading Paladin Press books because there could be a connection, however remote. I want to talk about it with more people than are willing to on reddit. I don’t know much about you but get the sense you know about forensic science.

interesting, did you grow up in boulder colorado? how old were you when Jonbenet was murdered?

No I didn’t grow up here and OMG i just realized it’s been 41 years today since I rolled into town. I’m an old lady. I was 42 when JB was murdered.

How old are you?

searchinGirl wrote:Well, I have just found myself immersed in the JBR case lately. I’m hoping ancestry dna might lead to a suspect. I think SBTC might stand for Eastern Religions... Shambhala, Buddhism (Bon), Taoism, Confucianism. I’m grossing myself out reading Paladin Press books because there could be a connection, however remote. I want to talk about it with more people than are willing to on reddit. I don’t know much about you but get the sense you know about forensic science.

why do you say SBTC eastern religions?

i think in the intruder context it make sense

Seduced by the Child

Seduced by the Child fits too. I started thinking about it being Eastern Religions because of martial arts and it origins. I look around Boulder and see a possible connection there. If a Foreign Faction pulled of this crime, the perps were probably acting like ninjas. I don’t know about pedophiles in Boulder though.

searchinGirl wrote:Seduced by the Child fits too. I started thinking about it being Eastern Religions because of martial arts and it origins. I look around Boulder and see a possible connection there. If a Foreign Faction pulled of this crime, the perps were probably acting like ninjas. I don’t know about pedophiles in Boulder though.

the theory i promote is the pedophile specifically mr cruel. if you search this blog you'll see my posts