Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > True Crime
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-09-2012, 10:56 PM
 
Location: Australia
4,001 posts, read 6,260,123 times
Reputation: 6855

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nighthouse66 View Post
i had urinary tract infections several times as a child. that alone does not constitute evidence of sexual abuse.

i think all of the evidence by now shows that the ramseys did NOT do it. patty ramsey, to my knowledge, did not possess the equipment necessary to leave a sperm sample in her daughter's body. not only that, but there was ample opportunity for someone to come into that house, and evidence suggesting that was given short shrift.

i think that the tendency here is for people to latch on to the easy answer, because they want answers. jon-benet's death was horrific and a tragedy, and people want to find an answer to that, something that satisfies them and perhaps makes them feel that this won't happen to their own child. after all, if it's the parents who did this, then we have one less freak wandering the streets who is murdering and raping children in their own homes. unfortunately, a clear look at the evidence (which the police were unable or willing to cast) has made this case the whodunit we have today. and there are many, many cases of children being abducted out of their own homes, even sexually assaulted, while the parents sleep. this we know to be true.

people murder their children every day. when they do so, there is usually evidence of horrific abuse beforehand. when there isn't, it is usually a case of a woman killing her children due to mental illness or post partum depression. sometimes abuse is evident before in those cases, but sometimes not. sometimes mothers will love and care for their children all their lives, and one day simply snap. but to my knowledge, there has never been a child killing by the parents under these circumstances. this has all the hallmarks of a very clever child killer who has continued to escape detection. parents don't just sexually murder their children on christmas night, leave the body in the house, and do so with no prior evidence of abuse or even evidence of behavioral problems- either from their earlier children, themselves, or job-benet. happy adjusted children are not habitually abused and remain happy adjusted children.

this thread has gone on for quite a while. i personally would like to see some speculation on WHO ELSE could have done this, because i don't believe the parents did. perhaps i will start another thread.

I dispute this, as I believe the beauty pageants JBR was forced to perform in constitute abuse and will one day be recognised as such and made illegal.

The way most random murderers are caught is when they make a mistake.

This individual has never repeated this crime, that we know of...nor in my opinion, is he/she likely to being 6 ft under.

The touch DNA will never turn up on CODIS, and history will eventually allocate blame back where it belongs. IMO.

Start a new thread by all means, I will be interested to read all alternate theories as a lot of them are in danger of being lost to time.

Last edited by MsAnnThrope; 06-09-2012 at 11:04 PM..

 
Old 06-09-2012, 11:12 PM
 
Location: Australia
4,001 posts, read 6,260,123 times
Reputation: 6855
Quote:
Originally Posted by nighthouse66 View Post
i had urinary tract infections several times as a child. that alone does not constitute evidence of sexual abuse.

i think all of the evidence by now shows that the ramseys did NOT do it. patty ramsey, to my knowledge, did not possess the equipment necessary to leave a sperm sample in her daughter's body. not only that, but there was ample opportunity for someone to come into that house, and evidence suggesting that was given short shrift.

i think that the tendency here is for people to latch on to the easy answer, because they want answers. jon-benet's death was horrific and a tragedy, and people want to find an answer to that, something that satisfies them and perhaps makes them feel that this won't happen to their own child. after all, if it's the parents who did this, then we have one less freak wandering the streets who is murdering and raping children in their own homes. unfortunately, a clear look at the evidence (which the police were unable or willing to cast) has made this case the whodunit we have today. and there are many, many cases of children being abducted out of their own homes, even sexually assaulted, while the parents sleep. this we know to be true.

people murder their children every day. when they do so, there is usually evidence of horrific abuse beforehand. when there isn't, it is usually a case of a woman killing her children due to mental illness or post partum depression. sometimes abuse is evident before in those cases, but sometimes not. sometimes mothers will love and care for their children all their lives, and one day simply snap. but to my knowledge, there has never been a child killing by the parents under these circumstances. this has all the hallmarks of a very clever child killer who has continued to escape detection. parents don't just sexually murder their children on christmas night, leave the body in the house, and do so with no prior evidence of abuse or even evidence of behavioral problems- either from their earlier children, themselves, or job-benet. happy adjusted children are not habitually abused and remain happy adjusted children.

this thread has gone on for quite a while. i personally would like to see some speculation on WHO ELSE could have done this, because i don't believe the parents did. perhaps i will start another thread.

Susan Smith? Casey Anthony?
 
Old 06-09-2012, 11:24 PM
 
1,881 posts, read 3,345,438 times
Reputation: 3912
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsAnnThrope View Post
I dispute this, as I believe the beauty pageants JBR was forced to perform in constitute abuse and will one day be recognised as such and made illegal.

The way most random murderers are caught is when they make a mistake.

This individual has never repeated this crime, that we know of...nor in my opinion, is he/she likely to being 6 ft under.

The touch DNA will never turn up on CODIS, and history will eventually allocate blame back where it belongs. IMO.

Start a new thread by all means, I will be interested to read all alternate theories as a lot of them are in danger of being lost to time.
i agree with you, i do think to some extent that some pageant mothers take it too far. but i don't think it will ever be made illegal. there are many little girls- and i have met a few, living in los angeles- who just want to get up there and dance and sing. period. not ALL of them are living a vicarious dream of their freaky moms. some, but not all. i certainly cannot take that as evidence that she was murdered by her mother. no way. and the DNA inside her body will one day be identified. it did not match ANYONE in her family. that is factual.
 
Old 06-10-2012, 07:54 AM
 
Location: So Ca
26,659 posts, read 26,627,701 times
Reputation: 24712
Quote:
Originally Posted by nighthouse66 View Post
to my knowledge, there has never been a child killing by the parents under these circumstances.
I agree. Neither parent's profile appears to fit in this case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsAnnThrope View Post
Susan Smith? Casey Anthony?
Susan Anthony had a history of mental illness, clinical depression, prior suicide attempts, a father who committed suicide, an emotionally negligent mother who looked the other way when she complained that her stepfather was mistreating--and possibly sexually abusing--her. Casey Anthony is most likely a sociopath, with a long history of unstable behavior. There is nothing in Patsy Ramsey's prior history that would indicate similarity in behavior to these two mothers.
 
Old 06-10-2012, 03:57 PM
 
Location: Australia
4,001 posts, read 6,260,123 times
Reputation: 6855
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now View Post
I agree. Neither parent's profile appears to fit in this case.



Susan Anthony had a history of mental illness, clinical depression, prior suicide attempts, a father who committed suicide, an emotionally negligent mother who looked the other way when she complained that her stepfather was mistreating--and possibly sexually abusing--her. Casey Anthony is most likely a sociopath, with a long history of unstable behavior. There is nothing in Patsy Ramsey's prior history that would indicate similarity in behavior to these two mothers.

Nothing that hit the news, anyway. Don't forget - there WAS NO TRIAL...which means that there was nothing said that PR's lawyers didn't allow her to say. The Ramseys also spent a great deal of time and money suing anybody around them who might've said otherwise.

This is the difference between a suspect who lawyers up immediately, and one who does not.

Anyone who reads PR's interview transcript can see the lies. It doesn't take a rocket scientist.

What I find gob-smacking is how people say "she couldn't have" based on exactly NO EVIDENCE.

She could have, and she did...in fact mothers killing/raping/injuring their children is becoming the new crime. 20 years ago everyone struggled to believe it.

I have stated my belief that there was a history of abuse. The preparations for child beauty pageants that JBR was forced to endure are beyond normal, and abusive by nature.
 
Old 06-10-2012, 08:16 PM
 
18,837 posts, read 37,281,021 times
Reputation: 26463
We don't know if either of the Ramsey's had a substance abuse problem. We don't know anything about the family issues in that home. There is not enough information INMO to rule out either parent. Or to conclusively state an outside perpetrator did this crime.

I do know that rich folks treat their kids different. I once worked at a very exclusive residential school for teenage girls...many of the parents treated their daughters like little show dogs...and did not understand why their daughters were all screwed up. So...they sent them away to be "fixed"...I think if Jon Benet had lived...I have no doubt she would have been sent to a similar school as a teem.
 
Old 06-10-2012, 08:55 PM
 
Location: So Ca
26,659 posts, read 26,627,701 times
Reputation: 24712
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasper12 View Post
There is not enough information INMO to rule out either parent.
How do you explain that DNA reports ruled out family members?

Quote:
Or to conclusively state an outside perpetrator did this crime.
Actually, they have a DNA profile. It just doesn't match anyone in their system.
 
Old 06-10-2012, 09:40 PM
 
Location: Australia
4,001 posts, read 6,260,123 times
Reputation: 6855
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now View Post
How do you explain that DNA reports ruled out family members?



Actually, they have a DNA profile. It just doesn't match anyone in their system.
A crooked politician declared their innocence as one of her final, face-saving acts of office.

She claimed that the discovery on JBR's underwear of touch DNA exonerated the parents. In reality it did no such thing.

Touch DNA is not blood, skin, hair or semen but microscopic cells. Touch DNA occurs everywhere in the world as these cells are very easily transferred.

A scientist tested several packets of brand new, unopened underwear and found mystery touch DNA on all of them, presumably from the chinese worker who had manufactered or packed them. JBR was wearing brand new underwear when found.

This mystery DNA will never be identified. There will never be a hit on CODIS. There is no mystery assailant. The touch DNA belongs to some oblivious factory worker in Asia somewhere.
 
Old 06-13-2012, 07:17 AM
 
Location: So Ca
26,659 posts, read 26,627,701 times
Reputation: 24712
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsAnnThrope View Post
A crooked politician declared their innocence as one of her final, face-saving acts of office. The touch DNA belongs to some oblivious factory worker in Asia somewhere.
I disagree.

"DNA from two sites on the long johns matched genetic material from the same unknown male that had previously been recovered from blood in JonBenet's underpants. The matching DNA from three places on two articles of JonBenet's clothing convinced the district attorney that it belonged to the killer, and hadn't been left accidentally by a third party." from Forensic Science

"...prosecutors turned over long underwear JonBenet was wearing to the Bode Technology Group near Washington, which looked for "touch DNA," or cells left behind where someone has touched something. The lab has only been using this technology since 2005. The laboratory found previously undiscovered genetic material on the sides of the girl's long underwear, where an attacker would have grasped the clothing to pull it down, authorities said. The DNA matched the genetic material found earlier.....the presence of the same male DNA in three places on the girl's clothing convinced investigators it belonged to JonBenet's killer and had not been left accidentally by an innocent party." from: truthinjustice.org

"With Touch DNA, it is claimed that they get the best samples from areas of clothing where force has been applied. They said that when force is applied, the skins cells are more apt to be "live" cells, whereas those taken from a "light" touch source are more likely to be dead skin cells. Apparently the live skin cells give more accurate evidence, as in the Ramsey case...." from webbsleuths
 
Old 06-13-2012, 10:05 AM
 
Location: 39 20' 59"N / 75 30' 53"W
16,077 posts, read 28,497,719 times
Reputation: 18189
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now View Post
I disagree.

"...prosecutors turned over long underwear JonBenet was wearing to the Bode Technology Group near Washington, which looked for "touch DNA," or cells left behind where someone has touched something. The lab has only been using this technology since 2005. The laboratory found previously undiscovered genetic material on the sides of the girl's long underwear, where an attacker would have grasped the clothing to pull it down, authorities said. The DNA matched the genetic material found earlier.....the presence of the same male DNA in three places on the girl's clothing convinced investigators it belonged to JonBenet's killer and had not been left accidentally by an innocent party." from: truthinjustice.org
Technology, 9yrs after shows it wasn't the family.

Now all investigators need is a perp, may take another 20yrs, its possible there will be closure.

I believe reports the child was molested. Patsy Ramsey wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer. Pedophiles go undetected, I can see how it could happen.

Last edited by virgode; 06-13-2012 at 10:33 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:04 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top