Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.



Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 6
» Latest member: John Andrew
» Forum threads: 1,682
» Forum posts: 5,376

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 38 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 38 Guest(s)

Latest Threads
Perry Freeman
Forum: BORG theories and BORG people of note
Last Post: jameson245
09-26-2020, 10:41 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 265
Murdered in home
Forum: Names to remember
Last Post: jameson245
09-26-2020, 12:09 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 118
OTHER missing children
Forum: Names to remember
Last Post: jameson245
09-26-2020, 11:46 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 93
Rosie Tapia
Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds
Last Post: jameson245
09-26-2020, 11:33 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 610
Kirsten Hatfield
Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds
Last Post: jameson245
09-26-2020, 11:28 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 1,502
Jessica Lunsford
Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds
Last Post: jameson245
09-26-2020, 11:09 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 1,592
Christine McGowen - murde...
Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds
Last Post: jameson245
09-26-2020, 10:52 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 68
Larry Eugene Mann - Elisa...
Forum: other crimes - repeat offenders - not Ramsey related
Last Post: jameson245
09-26-2020, 10:26 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 111
Do intruders kill just 1 ...
Forum: Intruder evidence
Last Post: jameson245
09-25-2020, 12:12 PM
» Replies: 3
» Views: 258
Do intruders enter via ba...
Forum: Broken window/ Spider web
Last Post: jameson245
09-25-2020, 11:49 AM
» Replies: 4
» Views: 337

  They acted wrong
Posted by: jameson245 - 10-12-2019, 10:08 AM - Forum: odds and ends - No Replies

Quotes from Bynum and Beuf

DIANE SAWYER: (voice-over) When Bynum, who had lost an infant grandchild of his own, learned that JonBenet had been murdered, he rushed to a friend's house, where the Ramseys and their nine-year-old son Burke (ph) had gone to stay.

(on camera) Can you tell me about what you saw when you walked in that door?

MICHAEL BYNUM: I think I can. John and Patsy were there with family and friends, their minister. And just after I got there, everyone was -- sorry --was kneeling in the living room and praying together. And when they got through, I went up and hugged John and -- and then I went over to Patsy. She was sitting on the couch. And I had to help her up and -- and give her a hug. So that was what I found when I got there. Everyone was devastated. It was difficult.

DIANE SAWYER: (voice-over) And there is someone else who was there that night who says Patsy Ramsey had collapsed.

(From taped telephone conversation)

Dr. FRANCESCO (PH) BEUF, JonBenet's Pediatrician: She was just lying on the floor.

DIANE SAWYER: (voice-over) His name is Dr. Francesco Beuf. He was JonBenet's pediatrician. He talked to me by phone about whether Mrs. Ramsey's grief was real.

(From taped telephone conversation)

Dr. FRANCESCO BEUF: Oh, for God's sake, she was as devastated as anyone could be by a terrible loss like that. They called me to provide some tranquilizers for her. She was absolutely shattered by this.

DIANE SAWYER: And Mr. Ramsey?

Dr. FRANCESCO BEUF: He looked absolutely devastated. To me, they were the most appropriate reactions in the world. God knows, I wouldn't know how I'd react if one of my children had been murdered, particularly in such horrible circumstances. He paced and paced and paced. He and I went out for a walk for a while that night. It's the wreckage of two human beings.

Print this item

  North Fox Island stuff -
Posted by: jameson245 - 10-10-2019, 03:27 PM - Forum: We Are the BORG. - No Replies

I didn't get on the dark web once in my research. I haven't seen what Singular has seen. Yet I feel I have a greater picture of what occurred than him.
A lot is written about Starchild, Shelden, and Grossman. Starchild was a prolific writer.
I don't admit I have no receipts. other than that, yes, I do agree it sounds ridiculous. That being said, I believe that is intentional. Just as the satanic panic was used to cover very real instances of sexual assault, I believe the sheer strain of believability helps protect the network.
I'm not here to dog on John. I believe his suffering is real. I do not believe he felt he had a choice. sadly, I have come to believe that self preservation is the norm in most of humanity and do not find said choice to be the most wicked or evil thing imaginable. I've put myself in his shoes. I feel sorry for John.
I believe you are correct and have always felt the authorities were the MOST to blame for what happened, and if we are talking danger, their consistent attempts to protect image put the entire Boulder population in danger via a false sense of safety. Amy was something that happened as a direct result of the corruption of BPD. I do believe they tried scapegoating John to protect themselves.
Well, the evidence is there. Literally every piece of evidence in this case points in this direction. All of it.
First, let's look at the actual crime scene and see the parallels.
Why Jonbenet, why Christmas, what is the significance?
I believe the murder was an artistic recreation of the murder of Jill Robinson on Christmas night 1976, exactly 20 years to close to the hour (and my belief likely to the minute).
Jill Robinson was 12 years old and taken on a Wednesday. Jonbenet was found in size 12 underwear with the word Wednesday on it.
Jill Robinson was found in front of the Big Beaver Road exit sign off a highway in Troy. Jonbenet, peculiarly, was found with beaver hair in her hand.
Jill Robinson was found buried in a white blanket of snow, Jonbenet was found covered in a white blanket herself.
Stories about Jill reported about Xmas presents still being under the tree and her last time spent riding her bicycle. two elements of the Jonbenet Ramsey murder.
Only one other child killer case in history has a child being found with her favorite food in her stomach. This is a murder related to the network in question, the murder of Tim King.
Markings on Jonbenet's photograph match markings found on said materials relating to the network.
At the time the network had three hubs, Michigan, Colorado, and New York. Major scrutiny by federal authorities pushed Starchild to the Aspen property of Francis Shelden.
Other things virtually identical: pedophiles confessing to participation in the murders. memorabilia and shrines dedicated to victims being found in pedophiles homes. objects from the crimes passed from pedophile to pedophile.
Perhaps most interestingly is the ransom note itself features the names of all 4 occk kids. This is baffling.
Additionally, the Danto Letter is remarkably similar in construction to the Ransom note.
The Network exists, it's widespread, anyone who's taken the time to read the 200+ page report on the network released by federal authorities during the 70's (look up Gerald Richards Senate testimony) will see what they are looking at is a sophisticated network that not only never went down, but sadly and sickly enough spread globally thanks to Pedophile Information Exchange and Spartacus.
I'd recommend, for fun, searching Port Huron Cathy Broad North Fox Island to hear the story of a young girl released shortly before Jonbenet's death pertaining to the NFI ring which details the brutal murders that took place in creation of snuff involving prominent men and women of Michigan, including doctors and political figures.
To me the slam dunk is artwork that is virtually identical to artwork believed to be put on display by the occk network at crime scenes. This artwork has inspired many recreations, including most famously the Jonbenet tooth heart painting found in a random home in Maryland or some $+#&.
This artwork was found on display in the Ramsey basement and has never been sourced.
May I ask you this:
Why do you find my theory dangerous? I get why you may feel it's disgusting. I too find what happened disgusting. I'd think the idea was disgusting if I didn't believe it, too. For many years I too would have believed that this strains reality.
Of course, that was before dedicating years to researching this sort of travesty and seeing case example after case example.
I've done my research, but why is my research uniquely dangerous? Is it dangerous to you? Its only DANGEROUS if I'm right. There are a million crackpot theories, yet for years now every time I peak my head out of the turtle shell I get censored or shut down. Why is it more dangerous than the belief a 10 year old kid did it? Or that Patsy did it because she peed herself?
Again, it's only dangerous if I'm right. and if I'm right, well, I could give a rats behind whether the info I present is dangerous to people who actively support this wicked system. I'm not Muslim, but I do believe one thing: the murder of a child is as if one killed all of humanity. So if I'm right and what I state is dangerous, GOOD.
There are numerous underground videos pertaining to Jonbenet Ramsey. According to Singular, the dark web is host to some seriously depraved imagery and video involving the Ramsey children.
I did not see any of those particular tapes. I have zero interest in materials that are federally illegal to see. I did, however, see a video pertaining to her murder leading up to the actual murder.
The video I saw featured multiple elements, but most interesting to me is the handicam footage leading up to the Ramsey steps. Essentially, a couple individuals knock on the Ramsey door lightly. John answers it. They ask where she is, he says at the table. They ask him if they knew what they were there to do. He said yes.
Another part of it featured an interview with John Ramsey after the fact asking him if he felt guilty and he states "she was only 6" and goes on to act as if it's not a decision he regrets. He also talks about being caught watching the footage afterwards and his response was "it's hot." It is important to note this is a blackmail network which exists on the idea of gathering humiliating materials. This being said, whether John actually regrets it, saw the film afterwards, etc, is still unknown, because it could have just been things he was blackmailed to say.
There are other tapes pertaining to Ramsey. another one of importance is the Bill McReynolds tape. This shows a few important details, such as the fact his beard was fake, and that DNA gathered from Bill was plucked from his fake ass beard, not his head.
None of this stuff matters essentially. I cannot produce said tapes. if I did, I'd be dead tomorrow. This case is unsolved for a reason. There is a reason Kelkoa has received numerous responses from FBI about this case being an issue of national security.
I don't judge the Ramsey's based on behavior. I try not to judge period. The reality is that Evidence is what led me to the opinion I have: that John Ramsey willfully and knowingly handed his daughter over to be killed under blackmail.
I base this opinion on these reasons:
The absolutely ridiculous amount of parallels between the murder of Jonbenet Ramsey and a series of murders connected to a pedophile network that surrounded the Ramsey dynasty in the 70's.
Evidence that directly connects the murder of Jonbenet to the known blackmail network associated with the child porn cabal.
Evidence that directly connects Randy Simmons to the same network, found on photographs taken of Jonbenet Ramsey by Randall Simmons.
Not one but two confessions by two separate pedophiles claiming participation in said murders.
Memorabilia from the murders being passed from house to house across the country by known pedophiles including evidence (candy canes from front of house) taken directly from Boulder Police.
The massive amount of known high ups that had infiltrated Boulder in 1995-1996 leading up to Jonbenet Ramsey's murder, including Adam Starchild aka Malcolm McConahy, who was the financial manipulator for the pedophile network in question.
There is a lot more that leads me to my conclusion. I do find John's behavior to be domineering. That being said, i only consider one response from him strong evidence: His response to asking if the doors were locked. He got upset and angry, this is a known sign of something that sets someone off as an accusation. I don't think the average person would take such visceral offense to it, unless it struck a nerve. This is the predominant evidence i can share as to why i believe he opened the door to the home for them to come in.
Of course I've also watched the tape so what would I know.
 You want mainstream articles? can't give em to you. media won't touch this for the same reason it won't hint at what really happened in Atlanta: the network is considered an issue of national security.
James Dudley Ramsey was the head of Michigan Aeronautics during the 70's and would have personally surveyed North Fox Island, not to mention would have had to sign off on the project. North Fox Island is where little boys were flown to be abused by wealthy, powerful people stretching the country. Only one person was ever arrested in what was considered the largest child abuse organization in America at the time.
John Ramsey flew the same docks the boys were shipped from the same summer, at one point actually being talked to by investigators relating to a known NFI pilot Stephen Stanislaw, who also knew Ramsey's father.
Years later, Cathy Obrien would speak out about a sister operation that took place on Beaver Island involving little girls and naming John Ramsey as one of the people involved.
John Ramsey flew the same docks the boys were shipped from the same summer, at one point actually being talked to by investigators relating to a known NFI pilot Stephen Stanislaw, who also knew Ramsey's father.
Interestingly, I Googled this guy's name. His own daughter claims he was an admitted serial killer, and is under the impression that he was D.B. Cooper, the Zodiac Killer, and was responsible for the OCCK. He allegedly killed his father in 1981, and got locked away at a mental health facility - and was released two weeks before JonBenet was murdered.
Not that I think he killed JonBenet, or am sold on the existence of this child porn ring you describe. I'm just kind of surprised his name hasn't been dropped more often.
This ring is referred to as North Fox Island. not much is known about it via mainstream outlets because mainstream outlets never reported it due to who was involved. It was purportedly ran by an individual named Francis Shelden, which spread his depravity internationally from a base in the Netherlands after he fled once the scandal broke.
The ring exists. that is not up for debate. That is accepted fact by law enforcement, it's just not spoken fact.

Print this item

  Tony Ortega
Posted by: jameson245 - 10-06-2019, 08:52 AM - Forum: Michael Tracey - No Replies

JonBenet Flimsy
As the case against John Mark Karr disintegrates, attention turns to CU prof Michael Tracey, who's fingered false suspects in the past.
Article Published Aug 17, 2006

DetailsWhile the case against John Mark Karr disintegrates by the minute, New Times has learned that this isn't the first time Colorado University Professor Michael Tracey has caused a stir by fingering a "prime suspect" in the JonBenet Ramsey murder case only to be proved wrong.

In 2004, Tracey, a British expatriate journalism professor and documentarian, produced a film about the Ramsey murder that aired on British television but not in the United States. By then, however, Tracey was already considered a notorious developer of false leads by a large group of Internet sleuths who congregated at Forums for Justice, a website started by a radio disc jockey named Tricia Griffith.

"If you know the case and you watch Tracey's documentaries, they're filled with blatant lies. It's so easily proven," Griffith says from Park City, Utah, where she does radio and voiceover work. In Tracey's 2004 documentary, Who Killed the Pageant Queen?, the professor claimed to have stunning new evidence that was leading police to a previously unidentified "prime suspect." The documentary claimed that police were trying unsuccessfully to track down the man because he had gone "underground." Tracey's film didn't name the man, but a document was shown onscreen that purported to be a police record of the suspect, with the suspect's name and address blacked out.

Griffith says an alert viewer in Scotland recorded the show and was able to do a screen capture of the police report. The image included a document number, enough information for Griffith to track down her own copy of the document.

Tracey's "prime suspect" turned out to be John Steven Gigax, who was, in fact, an acquaintance of Michael Helgoth's, who, in "intruder" theories about the murder of JonBenet, was long considered a possible suspect.

However, contrary to Tracey's claim that Gigax was underground and untraceable, Griffith found him in ten minutes with a simple Google search. "He was selling jewelry on the Internet," Griffith says.

Griffith says Gigax immediately contacted Boulder police to see if they were really looking for him.

They weren't.

"I talked to [Boulder District Attorney Investigator] Tom Bennett myself, and he said Gigax was never a suspect. Gigax can prove he was in Indiana on the day of the murder."

That sounds familiar. Two years later, Tracey has electrified the world with his fingering of another suspect who, it's looking likely, will turn out to have been in another state when JonBenet Ramsey was killed in the early hours of December 26, 1996. New Times tried to contact Tracey but was unable to do so.

After debunking Tracey's documentary, Griffith put out a news release (you can still find it at forumsforjustice.org), but she says she got no media interest from it.

In fact, when New Times phoned her this morning to ask about the Tracey documentary, she said she was getting no other inquiries from reporters.

As the rest of the media feed on the inconsistencies of John Mark Karr's confessions, they may soon turn their attention to the Colorado professor who has apparently yelled "Fire!" in this case before.


Print this item

  Cindy's GoFundMe
Posted by: jameson245 - 09-13-2019, 09:01 PM - Forum: GO FUND ME - a way anyone can help - No Replies

Lou's daughter, Cindy started a GoFundMe page and raised 39,000 to help go after suspects.  One comment on the page was interesting and I share it here.

Fran Sanders donated [b]$22[/b]

Lived in Boulder before Jon Benet murder. Very good friend was the Assistant to the Chief of Boulder Police Dept. My friend was did not like little girls only boys (she had a boy) She did not like my daugther. My daughter was a tough one so I had a boy too so necer said anything. I asked her one time in the time line how the Police were doing on the case. Her comment was "Jon Bonet was a little slut" and they (Police) felt it was the family and that was that. I could not believe her response but filed it in the "friend" remark. I was saddened by her comments but stayed friends with her for 15 years until another comment about my life that made me angry. This has stayed with me all these years. I do not want to be known but thought you would want to hear this.

Print this item

  2019 request for funds
Posted by: jameson245 - 09-07-2019, 08:50 PM - Forum: Truth about Tricia Griffith and weBsleuths - No Replies


Dear ForumsForJustice.org members and friends,
For FFJ to continue we need 160 dollars for new software. Please help us out by donating at PayPal with the address

Until the money is raised FFJ will have to remain down.
ForumsforJustice.org is the sister site to Websleuths. It is a great place for everything JonBenet.
Ramsey lawyer L Lin Wood would LOVE IT if FFJ failed. Remember the time he subpoenaed me for the names of the moderators? He did not get on thing from FFJ, Websleuths or me.
It would be awful to know how glad L Lin Wood would be if FFJ ceased to exist.
One hundred and sixty dollars is all we need to keep FFJ going.
If you want to help keep JonBenet's memory alive we need to keep FFJ running but I cannot do it on my own anymore.
Thank you very much.
Tricia Griffith
Owner ForumsforJustice.org and Websleuths.com

Print this item

  Lacy letter to John Ramsey
Posted by: jameson245 - 09-07-2019, 01:23 PM - Forum: DNA - Touch DNA on long johns - No Replies

July 9, 2008
Mr. John Ramsey,
 As you are aware, since December 2002, the Boulder District Attorney's Office has been the agency responsible for the investigation of the homicide of your daughter, JonBenet. I understand that the fact that we have not been able to identify the person who killed her is a great disappointment that is a continuing hardship for you and your family.
 However, significant new evidence has recently been discovered through the application of relatively new methods of DNA analysis. This new scientific evidence convinces us that it is appropriate, given the circumstances of this case, to state that we do not consider your immediate family including you, your wife, Patsy, and your son, Burke, to be under any suspicion in the commission of this crime. I wish we could have done so before Mrs. Ramsey died.
 We became aware last summer that some private laboratories were conducting a new methodology described as "touch DNA." One method of sampling for touch DNA is the "scraping method." This is a process in which forensic scientists scrape places where there are no stains or other signs of the possible presence of DNA to recover for analysis any genetic material that might nonetheless be present. We contracted with the Bode Technology Group, a highly reputable laboratory recommended to us by several law enforcement agencies to use the scraping method for touch DNA on the long johns that JonBenet wore and that were probably handled by the perpetrator during the course of this crime.
 The Bode Technology laboratory was able to develop a profile from DNA recovered from the two sides of the long johns. The previously identified profile from the crotch of the underwear worn by JonBenet at the time of the murder matched the DNA recovered from the long johns at Bode.
 Unexplained DNA on the victim of a crime is powerful evidence. The match of male DNA on two separate items of clothing worn by the victim at the time of the murder makes it clear to us that an unknown male handled these items. Despite substantial efforts over the years to identify the source of this DNA, there is no innocent explanation for its incriminating presence at three sites on these two different items of clothing that JonBenet was wearing at the time of her murder.
 Solving this crime remains our goal, and its ultimate resolution will depend on more than just matching DNA. However, given the history of the publicity surrounding this case, I believe it is important and appropriate to provide you with our opinion that your family was not responsible for this crime. Based on the DNA results and our serious consideration of all the other evidence, we are comfortable that the profile now in CODIS is the profile of the perpetrator of this murder.
 To the extent that we may have contributed in any way to the public perception that you might have been involved in this crime, I am deeply sorry: No innocent person should have to endure such an extensive trial in the court of public opinion, especially when public officials have not had sufficient evidence to initiate a trial in a court of law. I have the greatest respect for the way you and your family have handled this adversity.
 I am aware that there will be those who will choose to continue to differ with our conclusion. But DNA is very often the most reliable forensic evidence we can hope to find and we rely on it often to bring to justice those who have committed crimes. I am very comfortable that our conclusion that this evidence has vindicated your family is based firmly on all of the evidence, including the reliable forensic DNA evidence that has been developed as a result of advances in that scientific field during this investigation.
 We intend in the future to treat you as the victims of this crime, with the sympathy due you because of the horrific loss you suffered. Otherwise, we will continue to refrain from publicly discussing the evidence in this case.
 We hope that we will one day obtain a DNA match from the CODIS data bank that will lead to further evidence and to the solution of this crime. With recent legislative changes throughout the country, the number of profiles available for comparison in the CODIS data bank is growing steadily. Law enforcement agencies are receiving increasing numbers of cold hits on DNA profiles that have been in the system for many years. We hope that one day soon we will get a match to this perpetrator. We will, of course, contact you immediately. Perhaps only then will we begin to understand the psychopathy or motivation for this brutal and senseless crime.
 Mary T. Lacy
 District Attorney
 Twentieth Judicial District
 Boulder, Colorado

Print this item

  press release
Posted by: jameson245 - 09-07-2019, 11:13 AM - Forum: DNA - Touch DNA on long johns - No Replies

Wednesday, July 09, 2008

Ramsey Press Release

Boulder District Attorney Mary T. Lacy issues the following announcement with regard to the investigation of the murder of JonBenet Ramsey.
On December 25-26, 1996, JonBenet Ramsey was murdered in the home where she lived with her mother, father and brother.  Despite a long and intensive investigation, the death of JonBenet remains unsolved. 
The murder has received unprecedented publicity and has been shrouded in controversy.  That publicity has led to many theories over the years in which suspicion has focused on one family member or another.  However, there has been at least one persistent stumbling block to the possibility of prosecuting any Ramsey family members for the death of JonBenet – DNA. 
As part of its investigation of the JonBenet Ramsey homicide, the Boulder Police identified genetic material with apparent evidentiary value.  Over time, the police continued to investigate DNA, including taking advantage of advances in the science and methodology.  One of the results of their efforts was that they identified genetic material and a DNA profile from drops of JonBenet’s blood located in the crotch of the underwear she was wearing at the time her body was discovered.  That genetic profile belongs to a male and does not belong to anyone in the Ramsey family. 
The police department diligently compared that profile to a very large number of people associated with the victim, with her family, and with the investigation, and has not identified the source, innocent or otherwise, of this DNA.  The Boulder Police and prosecutors assigned to this investigation in the past also worked conscientiously with laboratory analysts to obtain better results through new approaches and additional tests as they became available.  Those efforts ultimately led to the discovery of sufficient genetic markers from this male profile to enter it into the national DNA data bank.
In December of 2002, the Boulder District Attorney’s Office, under Mary T. Lacy, assumed responsibility for the investigation of the JonBenet Ramsey homicide.  Since then, this office has worked with the Boulder Police Department to continue the investigation of this crime.
In early August of 2007, District Attorney Lacy attended a Continuing Education Program in West Virginia sponsored by the National Institute of Justice on Forensic Biology and DNA.  The presenters discussed successful outcomes from a new methodology described as “touch DNA.”  One method for sampling for touch DNA is the “scraping method.”  In this process, forensic scientists scrape a surface where there is no observable stain or other indication of possible DNA in an effort to recover for analysis any genetic material that might nonetheless be present.  This methodology was not well known in this country until recently and is still used infrequently.
In October of 2007, we decided to pursue the possibility of submitting additional items from the JonBenet Ramsey homicide to be examined using this methodology.  We checked with a number of Colorado sources regarding which private laboratory to use for this work.  Based upon multiple recommendations, including that of the Boulder Police Department, we contacted the Bode Technology Group located near Washington, D.C., and initiated discussions with the professionals at that laboratory.  First Assistant District Attorney Peter Maguire and Investigator Andy Horita spent a full day with staff members at the Bode facility in early December of 2007.
The Bode Technology laboratory applied the “touch DNA” scraping method to both sides of the waist area of the long johns that JonBenet Ramsey was wearing over her underwear when her body was discovered.  These sites were chosen because evidence supports the likelihood that the perpetrator removed and/or replaced the long johns, perhaps by handling them on the sides near the waist.
On March 24, 2008, Bode informed us that they had recovered and identified genetic material from both sides of the waist area of the long johns.  The unknown male profile previously identified from the inside crotch area of the underwear matched the DNA recovered from the long johns at Bode. 
We consulted with a DNA expert from a different laboratory, who recommended additional investigation into the remote possibility that the DNA might have come from sources at the autopsy when this clothing was removed.  Additional samples were obtained and then analyzed by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation to assist us in this effort.  We received those results on June 27th of this year and are, as a result, confidant that this DNA did not come from innocent sources at the autopsy.  As mentioned above, extensive DNA testing had previously excluded people connected to the family and to the investigation as possible innocent sources. 
I want to acknowledge my appreciation for the efforts of the Boulder Police Department, Bode Technology Group, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, and the Denver Police Department Forensic Laboratory for the great work and assistance they have contributed to this investigation.  
The unexplained third party DNA on the clothing of the victim is very significant and powerful evidence.  It is very unlikely that there would be an innocent explanation for DNA found at three different locations on two separate items of clothing worn by the victim at the time of her murder.  This is particularly true in this case because the matching DNA profiles were found on genetic material from inside the crotch of the victim’s underwear and near the waist on both sides of her long johns, and because concerted efforts that might identify a source, and perhaps an innocent explanation, were unsuccessful. 
It is therefore the position of the Boulder District Attorney’s Office that this profile belongs to the perpetrator of the homicide.
DNA is very often the most reliable forensic evidence we can hope to find during a criminal investigation.  We rely on it often to bring to justice those who have committed crimes.  It can likewise be reliable evidence upon which to remove people from suspicion in appropriate cases.
The Boulder District Attorney’s Office does not consider any member of the Ramsey family, including John, Patsy, or Burke Ramsey, as suspects in this case.  We make this announcement now because we have recently obtained this new scientific evidence that adds significantly to the exculpatory value of the previous scientific evidence.  We do so with full appreciation for the other evidence in this case.
Local, national, and even international publicity has focused on the murder of JonBenet Ramsey.  Many members of the public came to believe that one or more of the Ramseys, including her mother or her father or even her brother, were responsible for this brutal homicide.  Those suspicions were not based on evidence that had been tested in court; rather, they were based on evidence reported by the media.
It is the responsibility of every prosecutor to seek justice.  That responsibility includes seeking justice for people whose reputations and lives can be damaged irreparably by the lingering specter of suspicion.  In a highly publicized case, the detrimental impact of publicity and suspicion on people’s lives can be extreme.  The suspicions about the Ramseys in this case created an ongoing living hell for the Ramsey family and their friends, which added to their suffering from the unexplained and devastating loss of JonBenet. 
For reasons including those discussed above, we believe that justice dictates that the Ramseys be treated only as victims of this very serious crime.  We will accord them all the rights guaranteed to the victims of violent crimes under the law in Colorado and all the respect and sympathy due from one human being to another.  To the extent that this office has added to the distress suffered by the Ramsey family at any time or to any degree, I offer my deepest apology. 
We prefer that any tips related to this ongoing investigation be submitted in writing or via electronic mail to BoulderDA.org, but they can also be submitted to our tip line at 
(303) 441-1636.
This office will make no further statements.  To read the text of the letter to John Ramsey click here.

Print this item

  letter to Moonves - CBS
Posted by: jameson245 - 08-17-2019, 12:33 PM - Forum: Fleet and Priscilla White - No Replies

[Image: photogrid_1565949743198-jpg.198683]

this is all found

Print this item

  Testa retires - Weinheimer in
Posted by: jameson245 - 08-17-2019, 10:42 AM - Forum: 2019 - Replies (1)

BOULDER, CO — Boulder Deputy Police Chief Carey Weinheimer, a 29-year veteran of the Boulder Police Department, will serve as interim police chief when Chief Greg Testa retires Sept. 3. Testa has served as Boulder Police Chief since 2014.
Weinheimer is expected to serve in the role for about 10 months until a new police chief is hired in 2020.
"Deputy Chief Weinheimer has played an essential role in maintaining the high standards of the department and in building our strong relationships with community members to ensure the Boulder Department continues to represent Boulder's values and a safe community for all individuals who live, work and visit here," said Jane Brautigam, Boulder city manager, in a statement. "I am confident that Deputy Chief Weinheimer is well prepared to lead the department with the full support of the leadership team and the respect of our officers throughout the organization."
Testa, who worked for the Boulder Police Department for 32 years, said it's been an "honor to serve the community."
Weinheimer joined the Boulder Police Department in 1990, and has since served as an officer, detective, sergeant, commander and deputy chief. He has been closely involved in the management of the police department and has worked with the city organization to launch the first-ever Boulder Stop Data Report, the city said. Weinheimer also is a member of the city's racial equity team and works with the Government Alliance on Racial Equity to improve treatment of all community members.
"We are fortunate that our police department is a healthy organization, and one that continues to challenge itself to be innovative, transparent and to reflect our community values," said Brautigam. "Deputy Chief Weinheimer understands the Police Department and the community. I am confident that he will be a strong interim chief until a new police chief is selected."
The city will conduct a search process for the next chief of police beginning in the fourth quarter of this year.
"In our search for Boulder's next police chief, understanding this community's values, maintaining strong department leadership, and partnering with residents to ensure Boulder has a transparent and equitable police force is essential" Brautigam said. "As part of our selection process, we will provide opportunities for the community to meet with the finalists and provide input on the candidates."
A date has not yet been set to fill the position. The city will work closely with law enforcement officers from outside organizations to evaluate candidates on policing standards, leadership, experience and preparedness to serve the Boulder community as chief of police.

Print this item

  Stephen Diamond's thoughts
Posted by: jameson245 - 08-08-2019, 06:18 PM - Forum: Ransom Note - Replies (22)

My comments under the line

What follows is a breakdown of the ransom note, exactly as it was written on several pages torn from the bedside pad of Patsy Ramsey and printed with a black felt pen (taken from and then interestingly returned to its original place in the home), before reportedly being found and read by Mrs. Ramsey. According to her, the strange note was apparently intentionally left on the stairs leading down from her bedroom to the home's main level. This odd choice on the part of the writer is curious unto itself. What led him or her to leave the letter on the stairs instead of, say, on the kitchen table or in the bedroom of either John and Patsy or JonBenet? If the intent was for the letter be discovered as early in the morning as possible, how could the alleged kidnapper have known of Patsy's habit of rising early and walking down these stairs to the kitchen to make coffee in the morning, unless the writer was intimately familiar with her daily routine? The note could have been left instead in the bathroom, for instance, where it might have been sooner seen, or right on the Ramsey's nightstand or on JonBenet's empty bed, the latter being the more dramatic and perhaps expected placement, stating and starkly demonstrating that we have taken your daughter from her bed and, to prove it, left this ransom note in her stead. But it was supposedly placed instead on the stairs for some unknown reason. This suggests to me that the ransom note may have been written, but was at least left on the stairs, some time after the family had gone to bed that night after returning from a Christmas party, if indeed it was discovered there in the morning as Patsy claimed. Or, in the theoretical case of a coverup, was placed there either by Patsy, in order to deceive John, or by Patsy and John conjointly after JonBenet was accidentally or intentionally killed that morning. But then, in the latter scenario, there would have been no need to stage it sitting on the stairs in the first place, if indeed it ever was left there by someone. So the story of the ransom note, how and where it was found, and by whom and when, is the first major mystery here. Next, there is the question of who actually wrote the so-called ransom note, something fairly extensive handwriting analysis has so far been unable to definitively answer, despite reported marked similarities to Patsy's writing samples submitted to police. Whether a thorough psychological analysis of this ransom note has previously been conducted by a forensic psychologist in this case is unclear to me. But it certainly seems that such an analysis could potentially provide some valuable clues regarding the ransom note's creator(s).


 pages torn from the bedside pad  - -  nope, we all know the pad was from the first floor back hall.

According to her, the strange note was apparently intentionally left on the stairs  - - what a stupid comment.  Someone didn't ACCIDENTLY leave the note there.

Diamond seems to think an intruder would, of course, want to leave the ransom note on the third floor - - take the risk of waking up the adults.  Is Diamond nutz?  The note was placed in a very logical place - - no way would it be missed there.

Diamond wrote, "the ransom note may have been written, but was at least left on the stairs, some time after the family had gone to bed that night after returning from a Christmas party, if indeed it was discovered there in the morning as Patsy claimed."  The BORG has chosen his position - - the rest of his paper will try to convince the reader he is right.  But yes, the note was left on the stirs sometime after the family got home.  When they first got home, if the note was already on those stairs, JOHN would have seen it as he carried JBR up those stairs.    Diamond doesn't think or reason right on this point and many others.

Like this thought - 
"Or, in the theoretical case of a coverup, was placed there either by Patsy, in order to deceive John, or by Patsy and John conjointly after JonBenet was accidentally or intentionally killed that morning. But then, in the latter scenario, there would have been no need to stage it sitting on the stairs in the first place, if indeed it ever was left there by someone. So the story of the ransom note, how and where it was found, and by whom and when, is the first major mystery here."

Lots of words to say nothing, IMO.

Print this item