The reasons I am RDI.

First you have Margoo's opinion and then you have the opinion of Spitz. The similarity there is they are both OPINION. I think Margoo is yanking your chain about seeing the pictures from the whites. FW turned over the pictures to the police, and I think it very safe to say the police didn't release the pictures therefore Margoo couldn't have seen them. They aren't on the internet now, nor have they ever been.

Henri McPhee wrote:

<quoted text>
This red turtleneck business is a confusing business because Steve Thomas was apt to jump to conclusions about it and he made up his ludicrous hypothetical scenario and guess about it.
What seems to have happened is that the Boulder cops made a police report after asking Patsy questions at the time of the murder in which they got the wrong end of the stick about the red turtleneck. That police report seems to have said that Patsy said JonBenet was wearing the turtleneck to bed that night. It was the same with the police report which falsely said John Ramsey read to JonBenet that evening.
Margoo had an interesting opinion about the matter. Margoo says that she has seen photos of the Whites' Christmas party which I have never seen. Those Whites' photos are not on the internet now:
"The stunning opinion that the endearing child was probably first choked with the turtleneck sweater she wore to bed was provided by renowned forensic expert Dr. Werner Spitz."
"Odd that he would presume she wore the turtleneck to bed when the same shirt she was wearing when found on the 26th was the one she wore to the Whites (confirmed through photos from the Whites) and the one both parents say she was wearing when she went to bed. So, HOW does ANYONE think it is reasonable that she changed to a turtleneck and then changed back to the white/star shirt? This sounds very much - AGAIN - like Spitz is commenting on this case on the basis of myths and rumors, not case facts."

More 'information' from Steve Thomas about the red turtleneck. It looks as though, according to him, that the red turtleneck was found on the bathroom counter. That bathroom was attached to her bedroom, rather like in a hotel room.:

"On the bathroom counter lay a balled-up child's red turtleneck sweater. Although Patsy said JonBenet had gone to bed wearing a red turtleneck, the body was discovered in the same white pullover she had worn the evening before. Who had changed her clothes?"

----------

2000 November 14 - About.Com Crime Chat with former Detective Steve Thomas

crimeADM: "Were the trash cans in the alley searched?"

stevethomas: "yes"

crimeADM: "Was JonBenet definitely wearing the red turtleneck at the Whites' party?"

stevethomas: "no, she was wearing the white top in which her body was eventually found the next day."

Exactly.

Henri McPhee wrote:

More 'information' from Steve Thomas about the red turtleneck. It looks as though, according to him, that the red turtleneck was found on the bathroom counter. That bathroom was attached to her bedroom, rather like in a hotel room.:
"On the bathroom counter lay a balled-up child's red turtleneck sweater. Although Patsy said JonBenet had gone to bed wearing a red turtleneck, the body was discovered in the same white pullover she had worn the evening before. Who had changed her clothes?"
----------
2000 November 14 - About.Com Crime Chat with former Detective Steve Thomas
crimeADM: "Were the trash cans in the alley searched?"
stevethomas: "yes"
crimeADM: "Was JonBenet definitely wearing the red turtleneck at the Whites' party?"
stevethomas: "no, she was wearing the white top in which her body was eventually found the next day."

JimmyWells wrote:

In just about any other circumstance the prints on the bowl and the fibers intertwined in the garrotte as well as the fibers in the paint tray would have been enough to indict. The DA's office did not go forward because they knew they would have been in over their head against superior defense attorneys. Wasting millions of dollars as well as being embarrassed on the worlds biggest stage might have been enough to convince them not to indict. If the Ramsey's were tried and found not guilty then a civil suit against the BPD as well as the DA's office would have been huge and too big a loss for Boulder to incur. Counties are self-insured which means all damages would be paid for by the taxpayers. It would have been a huge gamble to prosecute. I think the DA's office held back in the grand jury to undermine themselves into avoiding having to prosecute. It was kind of a clever way to "Pass the buck" to the jury all while wiping their own hands clean. <quoted text>

If all the evidence there is against the Ramseys is prints on the bowl and red fibers supposedly found in the paint tray, and supposedly the garrotte, then it's extremely weak evidence, and not enough evidence to convict anybody.

If the Boulder cops are so sure about that so-called forensic evidence then why don't they present the forensic reports and test results to back it up? Anybody can make up a theory about pineapple with no real proof, and fake a pineapple bowl bowl photo, in order to secure a false conviction. It's known as forensic fraud.

I do have my doubts and very little confidence that any red fibers were found until Henry Lee asked for the clothes Patsy was wearing. That was more than a year after the murder. Henry Lee then spread those red fibers around incriminating places among the forensic evidence. What is the date those red fibers were discovered?

I think the Ramseys were too honest about those clothes. If it had been me I would have said I had thrown those clothes out months ago.

You have got to be kidding. Henry Lee sprinkled fibers around? Are you bat**** crazy?

Henri McPhee wrote:

<quoted text>
If all the evidence there is against the Ramseys is prints on the bowl and red fibers supposedly found in the paint tray, and supposedly the garrotte, then it's extremely weak evidence, and not enough evidence to convict anybody.
If the Boulder cops are so sure about that so-called forensic evidence then why don't they present the forensic reports and test results to back it up? Anybody can make up a theory about pineapple with no real proof, and fake a pineapple bowl bowl photo, in order to secure a false conviction. It's known as forensic fraud.
I do have my doubts and very little confidence that any red fibers were found until Henry Lee asked for the clothes Patsy was wearing. That was more than a year after the murder. Henry Lee then spread those red fibers around incriminating places among the forensic evidence. What is the date those red fibers were discovered?
I think the Ramseys were too honest about those clothes. If it had been me I would have said I had thrown those clothes out months ago.

DrSeussMd wrote:

You have got to be kidding. Henry Lee sprinkled fibers around? Are you bat**** crazy? <quoted text>

I don't think it is bat crazy to say that. You are too trusting and gullible about forensic experts.

I remember reading a book from a public library by a British forensic expert years ago in which he wrote quite openly that some forensic exoperts will provide forensic reports and test results which suit the people who are paying that forensic expert.

He who pays the piper calls the tune.

We have never seen the forensic reports about those Ramsey case red fibers. It looks as though from what Steve Thomas said that the red fibers on the duct tape were not reported until four days before the Boulder police were due to make a presentation of their so-called evidence aginst the Ramseys.

Presumably the other red fibers in the paint tray, and other places, were noticed by the CBI lab prior to Henry Lee getting his fingers on Patsy's clothes. We don't know that for certain either.

There is some background information to Henry Lee in this article:

"A burnished image marred

A judge's challenge to expert Henry C. Lee's credibility is a stunning turn in a career whose profile rose with the celebrity cases he took.

By Peter Y. Hong, Times Staff Writer

June 3, 2007

In the all-out warfare of celebrity trials, forensic scientist Henry C. Lee is the nuclear weapon. Prosecutors and defense lawyers scramble to hire him in the hours after a high-profile arrest — not only to bolster their cases but also to keep him from joining the other side.

Lee has worked on the biggest celebrity cases of the last two decades: O.J. Simpson, William Kennedy Smith, Kobe Bryant, JonBenet Ramsey, Scott Peterson, Chandra Levy, Michael Skakel. His work has brought him his own fame. He has had his own cable TV show, courtrooms fill with spectators when he shows up for a trial, and he is hounded for autographs in public.

So when Lana Clarkson, a 40-year-old actress, was found shot to death Feb. 3, 2003, in music producer Phil Spector's home, attorney Robert Shapiro immediately flew in Lee from his Connecticut home. The lawyer got Lee into Spector's Alhambra mansion by the next evening to begin the scientific hunt for evidence to prove Spector innocent — or at least produce doubt of his guilt in jurors' minds.

But in a startling blow to Lee's illustrious career, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Larry Paul Fidler said he already has reasonable doubt — about Lee's credibility.

Fidler ruled last month that prosecutors could present testimony that Lee took evidence from the crime scene and kept it from prosecutors.

Lee, when vigorously denying that he improperly took anything from the crime scene, captured the magnitude of the allegation. "I think my reputation severely damaged," he said.

The judge's decision could also damage Lee beyond the Spector case. Future courtroom opponents might cite the ruling to chip at Lee's stature; prosecutors and defense attorneys might even decide not to hire him at all.

He called the fingernail allegation "a tactic to kill the messenger before the message is delivered."

Lee's setback occurred in the same downtown Los Angeles courthouse where, 12 years ago, he became a celebrity in his own right with his televised testimony in O.J. Simpson's trial. Jurors later cited Lee as a key factor in their acquittal of the former football star in the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Lyle Goldman.

Lee had questioned the LAPD's handling of blood evidence, suggesting that it could have been tampered with.

"Something's wrong," Lee famously said of the blood samples, leading the defense to suggest that officers could have planted Simpson's blood at the crime scene to frame him."

Thanks Henri for the clarification. With all the information...fact and fiction...its hard to distinguish actual official records and someone's hypothesis of what "may" have happened. This case would be a good class for CSI students to dissect. I've been intrigued by it from the get go.

People have been convicted on far less evidence than presented in this case. While in a case like this it might have not been enough to convict, it would have been enough for an arrest. Patsy would have sang in that interrogation. As far as your statement regarding the BPD I believe the forensic reports were cited during interrogation and through those reports they based their questions. Anybody can make up a theory but it's their job to do so and they are trained to do that very thing. So monday morning quarterbacking their trained decisions from your keyboard wouldn't seem prudent in this case now would it?

Henri McPhee wrote:

<quoted text>
If all the evidence there is against the Ramseys is prints on the bowl and red fibers supposedly found in the paint tray, and supposedly the garrotte, then it's extremely weak evidence, and not enough evidence to convict anybody.
If the Boulder cops are so sure about that so-called forensic evidence then why don't they present the forensic reports and test results to back it up? Anybody can make up a theory about pineapple with no real proof, and fake a pineapple bowl bowl photo, in order to secure a false conviction. It's known as forensic fraud.
I do have my doubts and very little confidence that any red fibers were found until Henry Lee asked for the clothes Patsy was wearing. That was more than a year after the murder. Henry Lee then spread those red fibers around incriminating places among the forensic evidence. What is the date those red fibers were discovered?
I think the Ramseys were too honest about those clothes. If it had been me I would have said I had thrown those clothes out months ago.

JimmyWells wrote:

being embarrassed on the worlds biggest stage <quoted text>

You don't know what you are talking about. Boulder IS the wourld's biggest stage AND it's own audience. And 'embarrassed'? They have no sense of shame. Does Ward Churchill ring a bell?

Apparently this went right over your empty head. Anywhere in the world can be it's biggest stage if the media is covering it.[ If you need further explanation about that send me a message. I'm not gonna waste the more privledged (All their chromosomes) people on this board just to humor you.

BrotherMoon wrote:

<quoted text>
You don't know what you are talking about. Boulder IS the wourld's biggest stage AND it's own audience. And 'embarrassed'? They have no sense of shame. Does Ward Churchill ring a bell?

Great men tend to be quoted throughout history so I appreciate you quoting me every chance you get Eva you dumb hole. Smash me in the face, don't warn me just do it. I'm gonna quote myself here from a previous post from the last time you spewed your nonsense "Women talking about fighting is like men talking about cooking." If you wanna be a man that is your business, deal with it in therapy. I would actually love to wake up to you tomorrow at my front door to "Smash me in the face again." I'm not sure when the first time was, apparently I missed that one. As you can see from my beautiful picture my face is clearly intact and is as glorious as ever. And this brings up another point. I post my hometown, my job, my picture, and my interests. You post fake names, fake towns, and nonsense. Who is the punk here? I know children with more backbone. You are weak minded and your only contributions here are quoting great men like myself then spewing insults in between. If you disagree with my statements tough shit, blow me. If you are posting from inside the U.S. "This time" I just exercised my 1st Ammendment right. That means I have the right to call you a slow witted twat at my own discretion. So go back to your basement, put on your male body suit, and dance around to "Goodbye Horses."

Cappie wrote:

JimmyWells wrote:
"In just about any other circumstance the prints on the bowl and the fibers intertwined in the garrotte as well as the fibers in the paint tray would have been enough to indict."
care to get smashed in the face again, you little PUNK? Hmmm?
Okay. I tried to warn you.
What do the fibers and the prints prove?
PIG keeps bitching about the spammer, largely because the spammer has identified her as the killer. GEE, despite all her whining about those murdering Rs and their lack of cooperation, just look at this FAT PIG.
She has a meltdown every time the perp's listed traits are matched to her own endearing qualities.
For example, the killer is likely to blame the Ramseys, whether they were involved or not.
GET OUT THE PAMPRIN

Very well thought out post, I probably could have predicted that, oh wait I did. Put down your strap-on before you start typing, it's clouding your mind.

JIMMYWELLS THE IDIOT wrote:

JimmyWells wrote:
"In just about any other circumstance the prints on the bowl and the fibers intertwined in the garrotte as well as the fibers in the paint tray would have been enough to indict."
care to get smashed in the face again, you little PUNK? Hmmm?
Okay. I tried to warn you.
What do the fibers and the prints prove?
"If you disagree with my statements tough shit, blow me."
Thanks jimmie d.
PIG keeps bitching about the spammer, largely because the spammer has identified her as the killer. GEE, despite all her whining about those murdering Rs and their lack of cooperation, just look at this FAT PIG.
She has a meltdown every time the perp's listed traits are matched to her own endearing qualities.
For example, the killer is likely to blame the Ramseys, whether they were involved or not.
GET OUT THE PAMPRIN
TOLD YA.
GET LOST YOU LITTLE PUNK

"Told ya" what? I told you to blow me and I meant it. So for the last time blow me you redundant quoting dope.

PIG SUCKS wrote:

SEE WHAT I MEAN?
THIS LITTLE PUNK MAKES RIDICULOUS CLAIMS AND WHEN CHALLENGED ABOUT THEM HIS VERY BEST ANSWER IS "BLOW ME."
TOLD YA.
BEAT IT OR DO YOU WANT TO GET YOUR FACE SMASHED IN AGAIN
YEA, THAT'S SOME EVIDENCE JIMMY
FIBERS AND PRINTS
ARREST PIG-O-PINK

Just a word to the wise Jimmy. Every good and great poster on this case has been flamed, so you're in good company. Just about all they "write" is unreadable swill, which is why they are flamers. They can't do anything else. I rarely even read their posts, and almost never give those idiots any attention by commenting on them. They get off on attention, even negative attention, because that's the only kind they can get. Don't ever forget why you came here to post, your knowledge of and interest in the case.

Yea I know Candy. Slow night at work so I'm having a little fun on my blackberry. I don't invest any thought in what that that pile of shit says I just enjoy insulting her. On another subject are you Candy from ACR? If so bravo on your website it is very resourceful…

candy wrote:

Just a word to the wise Jimmy. Every good and great poster on this case has been flamed, so you're in good company. Just about all they "write" is unreadable swill, which is why they are flamers. They can't do anything else. I rarely even read their posts, and almost never give those idiots any attention by commenting on them. They get off on attention, even negative attention, because that's the only kind they can get. Don't ever forget why you came here to post, your knowledge of and interest in the case.

Good morning Jimmy,

No they are not the same person. ACandy Rose and Candy are two separate people, each with their own unique knowledge of the case

62 currently viewing. What`s the record?

fascinating case. i also think the ramsays were responsible, but what puzzles me is why, and what was the motive. i dont buy the bed wetting theory, but i do think pat and john both killed her, then staged the scene.