A&E The Killing of JonBenet: The Truth Uncovered time for a redpill

I just watched A&E The Killing of JonBenet: The Truth Uncovered

On the morning of December 26, 1996, parents John and Patsy Ramsey awoke to find a ransom note for their missing 6-year-old daughter JonBenét before her brutally beaten and lifeless body was found in the basement of their home. Despite media storms, family accusations, false confessions, intruder theories and a grand jury hearing, the case has been unsolved for 20 years. Now, A&E reveals never-before-seen case details, including the first sit-down interview with John Ramsey marking the 20th anniversary of her brutal death, an interview from 1998 with JonBenét’s older brother and exclusive and stunning DNA evidence that sheds new light on swirling allegations that the killer may have been be a family member.

I'm going to offer you a choice



take the blue pill



and believe in any RDI bullshit you want. the parents did it. burke did it. it was an inside job. the marks on Jonbenet was from Burke's train tracks. there were no footprints in the snow. the handwriting matched patsy's. Jonbenet was sexually abused. there's no evidence of an intruder.

take the redpill



i'll show you how deep the rabbit hole goes. remember, all i offer you is the truth, nothing more.

there are many reviews of this program on the web, I'll get right to the point here

this is the daubert standard

n Daubert, seven members of the Court agreed on the following guidelines for admitting scientific expert testimony:

   Judge is gatekeeper: Under Rule 702, the task of "gatekeeping", or assuring that scientific expert testimony truly proceeds from "scientific knowledge", rests on the trial judge.
   Relevance and reliability: This requires the trial judge to ensure that the expert's testimony is "relevant to the task at hand" and that it rests "on a reliable foundation". Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 584-587. Concerns about expert testimony cannot be simply referred to the jury as a question of weight. Furthermore, the admissibility of expert testimony is governed by Rule 104(a), not Rule 104(b); thus, the Judge must find it more likely than not that the expert's methods are reliable and reliably applied to the facts at hand.
   Scientific knowledge = scientific method/methodology: A conclusion will qualify as scientific knowledge if the proponent can demonstrate that it is the product of sound "scientific methodology" derived from the scientific method.[3]
   Factors relevant: The Court defined "scientific methodology" as the process of formulating hypotheses and then conducting experiments to prove or falsify the hypothesis, and provided a nondispositive, nonexclusive, "flexible" set of "general observations" (i.e. not a "test")[4] that it considered relevant for establishing the "validity" of scientific testimony:

       Empirical testing: whether the theory or technique is falsifiable, refutable, and/or testable.
       Whether it has been subjected to peer review and publication.
       The known or potential error rate.
       The existence and maintenance of standards and controls concerning its operation.
       The degree to which the theory and technique is generally accepted by a relevant scientific community.

In 2000, Rule 702 was amended in an attempt to codify and structure elements embodied in the "Daubert trilogy." The rule then read as follows:

   Rule 702. Testimony by Experts


   If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.
   (As amended Apr. 17, 2000, eff. Dec. 1, 2000.)

In 2011, Rule 702 was again amended to make the language clearer. The rule now reads:

RULE 702. TESTIMONY BY EXPERT WITNESSES

A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if:

(a) The expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;

(b) The testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;

(c) The testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and

(d) The expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.

(As amended Apr. 17, 2000, eff. Dec. 1, 2000; Apr. 26, 2011, eff. Dec. 1, 2011)

While some federal courts still rely on pre-2000 opinions in determining the scope of Daubert, as a technical legal matter any earlier judicial rulings that conflict with the language of amended Rule 702 are no longer good precedent.

they interviewed at presented the conclusions of scientific expert witnesses who evaluated the forensic evidence, using science and their expert witness testimony.

their conclusion:

the scientific evidence found at the crime scene supports the intruder theory, and refutes the RDI theory. RDI is dead.

they summarize the findings of the forensic document examiner, there is no evidence that the ransom note handwriting is Patsy Ramsey's handwriting.

this is in sharp contrast to RDI claims that it is patsy's handwriting on the ransom note.

regarding the stun gun marks on Jonbenet vs James Kolar train tracks

Expert witness Stewart Hamilton "Highly unlikely. … It’s a lot bigger than the train track marks. Frankly, it borders on fanciful.” and concludes that could very well be the result of a stun gun. the marks are consistent with a burn injury from an electrical device


this is his credentials
http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/emfpu/staff/dr-stuart-hamilton

Deputy Chief Forensic Pathologist

East Midlands Forensic Pathology Unit
Contact Details

   Email: sjh107@le.ac.uk

Qualifications

   BMSc(Hons) First class Dundee 1995
   MB ChB Dundee 1998
   FPCPath in forensic pathology 2008
   Subspecialty registration in forensic pathology with the General Medical Council

Societies

   Member of the British Association in Forensic Medicine
   Member of the Faculty of Forensic and Legal Medicine
   Member of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences

Publications

   “Expression of the DEAD Box RNA Helicase p68 is developmentally and growth regulated and correlates with organ differentiation/maturation in the fetus.”  Journal of Pathology, vol 184: pp 351-359 (1998) (BMSc project with Dr Frances Fuller-Pace, Department of Pathology, Ninewells Hospital Dundee).
   “TNF b production is reduced in PHA stimulated Lymphocytes from HIV+ Individuals”. Presented at Society for Leukocyte Biology Meeting in Baltimore, December 1998. (Elective Project with Dr Janet L Lathey, University of California San Diego).
   “Sudden Death and Suicide: Comparison Of Brain Weight”.  British Journal of Psychiatry 2002 181
   “Commotio cordis – a report of 3 cases”. International Journal of Legal Medicine 2005 119(2) 88-90.
   “Death in the South Atlantic: A tale of two pathologists”. Hamilton SJ and Saunders SL.  ACP News Autumn 2011 p 15-18

so when you hear an RDI call the stun gun a myth ask what their credentials are. James Kolar is not a pathologist.  Dr Stuart Hamilton is. He rejects the train track explanation and affirms stun gun.
RDI who claim otherwise have no credentials to say otherwise. stun gun of course would strongly rule against the parents, as they have no need to use a stun gun and no evidence they own one.


Forensic scientist and expert witness on crime scene trace evidence Lawrence Kobalinsky

", “I think that the unescapable conclusion is that an unidentified male committed this crime. As soon as there’s a hit, he will be nailed, and that solves the crime.”

this is his expert witness

http://www.duq.edu/about/centers-and-institutes/cyril-h-wecht-institute-of-forensic-science-and-law/fixing-forensics-seminar/kobilinsky

Lawrence Kobilinsky, Ph.D.

Lawrence Kobilinsky, Ph.D., an internationally renowned forensic scientist and expert in DNA analysis, is the Chairman of the Science Department at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City. At John Jay, where he is a full time professor, Dr.  Kobilinsky has served as Acting Dean of Graduate Studies, Associate Provost, and Science Advisor to the College President. He is also a member of the doctoral faculties in biochemistry and criminal justice at the Graduate Center of The City University of New York.  A Fellow of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, Dr. Kobilinsky is a Diplomate of the American College of Forensic Examiners and a Board Certified Forensic Examiner. His case experience is extensive and engages a number of issues of applied forensic science.  He has served as advisor to criminal laboratories in Mexico, China, Brazil and the Dominican Republic. In the U.S., Dr. Kobilinsky is an advisor to the State Department regarding forensic science laboratories in the Ukraine. Dr. Kobilinsky is the recipient of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers’ "Civilian Award” and the New York Microscopical Society’s Ashby Award. Brazil awarded Dr. Kobilinsky the Medal of the City of Mogi das Cruzes for his efforts in establishing a forensic science laboratory as part of the city’s rape crisis center.

Lawrence Kobilinsky, is a DNA and forensic science qualified under Daubert and as an expert witness, he considered secondary DNA transfer and other possible explanations and rejected them.

in is expert witness testimony, the DNA found on Jonbenet is the killer's, and it is not one of the parents.

so if you see an RDI claiming otherwise, ask what their credentials are.

DNA expert Richard Eikelenboom confirms independent of Lawrence Kobilinsky that the DNA is of evidentiary value. It is best explained by the intruder theory. it can't simply be disregraded based on Kolar's claim that there were 6 profiles.

http://www.uis.edu/illinoisinnocenceproject/events/touchdna/reikelenboom/

Richard Eikelenboom

Richard is a forensic scientist specializing in trace evidence recovery and bloodstain pattern analysis
Experience

   DNA director
   Self-employed
   January 2005 – Present (11 years 9 months)

   Expert in Touch DNA

his expertise is in touch DNA and trace evidence, and he rejects secondary transfer, and instead confirms the DNA is most likely her killer's.

the conclusion is that the evidence rules out the parents as suspects. which is what Mary Lacy's letter said.

DNA evidence + all other evidence found at crime scene is most parsimoniously explained by an intruder. and this is a conclusion that expert witnesses in relevant areas of forensics, dna, trace evidence, crime scene reconstruction, handwriting linguistics, pathologists arrived at.

they debunk many RDI claims of foot prints in the snow, it's Patsy's handwriting, claims of sexual abuse etc. they do regard many of the things found at the crime scene as evidence of an intruder, including the disturbance at the grate above the basement window, and the missing paintbrush handle piece, which was broken and made into the garrote. one piece was missing. they confirm the parachute cord and tape was never source to the Ramseys and they think the intruder must have brought that in.

Dr. Leon Kelly

forensic pathologist addressed the issue of claims of chronic sexual abuse, he had personally reviewed both autopsy reports and claims by pediatricians - not pathologists - that she had been sexually abused to vaginitis. One pediatrician said she felt in her heart Jonbenet was sexually abused, and Leon Kelly said that is ridiculous. science does not deal with that.

www.uccs.edu/.../homicide140...
University of Colorado Colorado Springs
Leon Kelly, M.D. is a Deputy Chief Medical Examiner/Forensic Pathologist who has ... Dr. Kelly has also appeared as the forensic pathology consultant on the.

Dr. Leon Kelly, Deputy Chief Medical Examiner, El Paso County Office of the Coroner - Board of Directors

​

Dr. Kelly has been a community advocate and supporter of child abuse and neglect prevention through his work as Deputy Chief Medical Examiner, Board Member for Peaceful Households, Governor Appointed member of the Colorado State Child Fatality Review Team and past member of the El Paso County Child Death Review Committee. His community influence extends to the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs (UCCS) where he is a Lecturing Professor on Investigation of Death and Injury.

Dr. Kelly is American Board Certified in Forensic Pathology, Anatomic Pathology, and Clinical Pathology and has a Medical License from the Colorado State Board of Medical Examiners. He is a fellow member of the National Association of Medical Examiners, member of the College Society of Clinical Pathologists, and the American Society of Clinical Pathology.


Dr. Leon Kelly expert witness opinion is there is no evidence of any prior or ongoing sexual abuse of Jonbenet, and that the chronic inflamation recorded on autopsy is most likely due to vaginitis that could result from anything from bad toilet habbits to soap in a bath. his expertise includes child abuse.

Dr Francico Beuf jonbenet's pediatrician says he always think of sexual abuse and he saw no evidence of it.

conclusion there is no evidence jonbenet suffered prior sexual abuse.

head blow or strangulation. Most RDI say head blow first and strangulation was staging

Dr. Leon Kelly says strangulation first, based on the nail marks on her neck. the c-shape mark are self-injurious defensive injury she was alive and conscious and alive and fighting back.





the killer first put the garrotte low around her neck, as he pulled, it moved up and abraded the skin. Jonbenet was strangled first then struck by a blunt object. Jonbenet was alive.

AETV asked Dr. Stuart Hamilton a UK pathologist who brought in 3 other experts, one a neuropathologists and forensic pathologists. 4 total experts reviewed it.

Dr. Daniel du Pleuss pointed out after a head blow she would be completely KO. she would not be able to struggle. so he concludes to a medical certainty she was strangled first. and the c-shape marks are defensive marks as Jonbenet struggled to remove the parachute cord.

this strongly supports the intruder theory, as there is no reason for the Ramseys to attempt to strangle Jonbenet while conscious.

conclusion: ligature placed on neck, she clawed at it, then struck in the head, then died.

no pathologist garroting was staged to hide earlier blow to the head.

Name : Dr Daniel G Du Plessis
Address : Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust
Stott Lane
Lancashire
Post Code : M6 8HD
Country : England
Telephone : 0161 789 7373
Expertise : Accidental / unnatural death (Pathology)
Homicide Investigation
Pathology Of Trauma / Death

Dr. Daniel du Plessis MB, ChB, HonsBSC, MMed (Anat Path), FRCPath

Dr Daniel du Plessis hails from South Africa where he started his medical career. He received his MB, ChB degree from the University of Stellenbosch where he also began his training in Anatomical Pathology. He obtained his MMedPath degree cum laude in 1995, after which he was appointed as a Consultant Histopathologist (Anatomical Pathologist) at Tygerberg Hospital in Cape Town. Whilst in this post he obtained an Honours degree in Molecular Biology cum laude. He subsequently relocated to the UK to undergo further training in neuropathology at the Walton Centre for Neurology and Neurosurgery in Liverpool. He held training and research posts here from 1998 to 2003, becoming a Fellow of the Royal College of Pathologists with subspecialty accreditation in neuropathology in 2002.

He was appointed as a Consultant Neuropathologist at Salford Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and the Greater Manchester Neurosciences Centre in 2003. He is currently the Clinical Lead of the Department of Cellular Pathology at Salford Royal Hospital and an Honorary Lecturer at the University of Manchester Medical School. He also holds honorary consultant appointments at the Walton Centre and at Alder Hey Children’s Hospital in Liverpool.

His research interests are neurodegenerative disease, neuro-oncology and forensic neuropathology. He has been invited to be a co-editor for the planned second edition of Whitwell’s Forensic Neuropathology. Apart from his NHS commitments relating to clinical neuropathology he regularly receives instructions to provide adult and paediatric forensic neuropathology expert opinions and is regularly called upon to act as an expert witness (prosecution and defence) in High Court proceedings in the UK, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand. The Salford-based Neuropathology Unit acts as a forensic neuropathology training centre for the forensic pathology specialist registrars at the 3 forensic pathology-training centres in England. Dr du Plessis also contributes to the popular Euro-CNS forensic neuropathology course held regularly in Amsterdam as an invited lecturer. He is Treasurer of the British Neuropathological Society and a member of the British Association for Forensic Medicine (BAFM).

He was an invited participant at the closed experts meeting on the pathology of traumatic head injury in children held by the Royal College of Pathologists in December 2009 under the chairmanship of the President of the College. He has joined the UK National Police Improvement Agency (NPIA) Expert Advisers Database upon invitation. In 2014 Her Majesty’s Special Coroner for the Hillsborough Disaster Inquests instructed Dr du Plessis to act as neuropathology expert witness for the Coroner in these proceedings.

Dr Stuart Hamilton
Deputy Chief Forensic Pathologist

East Midlands Forensic Pathology Unit
Contact Details

Email: sjh107@le.ac.uk

Qualifications

BMSc(Hons) First class Dundee 1995
MB ChB Dundee 1998
FPCPath in forensic pathology 2008
Subspecialty registration in forensic pathology with the General Medical Council

Societies

Member of the British Association in Forensic Medicine
Member of the Faculty of Forensic and Legal Medicine
Member of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences

Publications

“Expression of the DEAD Box RNA Helicase p68 is developmentally and growth regulated and correlates with organ differentiation/maturation in the fetus.” Journal of Pathology, vol 184: pp 351-359 (1998) (BMSc project with Dr Frances Fuller-Pace, Department of Pathology, Ninewells Hospital Dundee).
“TNF b production is reduced in PHA stimulated Lymphocytes from HIV+ Individuals”. Presented at Society for Leukocyte Biology Meeting in Baltimore, December 1998. (Elective Project with Dr Janet L Lathey, University of California San Diego).
“Sudden Death and Suicide: Comparison Of Brain Weight”. British Journal of Psychiatry 2002 181
“Commotio cordis – a report of 3 cases”. International Journal of Legal Medicine 2005 119(2) 88-90.
“Death in the South Atlantic: A tale of two pathologists”. Hamilton SJ and Saunders SL. ACP News Autumn 2011 p 15-18

this will be a day long remembered. it has seen the end of superdave, it will soon see the end of RDI.

this is what is left of RDI



UNLIMITED POWER!

this is an example of RDI

this is trasha griffith


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.

if you listen to RDI who claims otherwise, ask what their credentials are. Are they an expert witness in the areas where they disagree? if not then their opinion is not of an expert witness. they are blue-pill.

"science is a tool for justice in this case" science has spoken.
science has established Jonbenet Ramsey was in fact killed by an intruder

99% of the RDI who you see deny this on topix, forumsforjustice, websleuth, reddit, on denver newspapers, have never went to college, never studied science, does not know and does not use science and scientific reasoning in their conclusions. for them "justice" consists of disregarding scientific evidence and scientific expert witness conclusions, who do know science and who used science to arrive at their conclusion

real science experts look at the evidence and draw conclusions that best explain the evidence. in this case intruder.

RDI are a lynch mob with a predetermined conclusion that Jonbenet parents did it, or brother, then cherry pick only those facts that support their claim and simply ignore the rest.

dna expert thinks dna could come from a hispanic male suspect - there is more hispanic ethnic markers in the dna than Caucasian european.