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

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 30
» Latest member: Robbieg82
» Forum threads: 1,090
» Forum posts: 3,394

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 25 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 25 Guest(s)

Latest Threads
Announcing the new tests
Forum: DNA -New testing - 2017
Last Post: CA4Now
12-14-2017, 05:43 PM
» Replies: 9
» Views: 1,192
Long John information
Forum: DNA - Touch DNA on long johns
Last Post: Kaligirlsam
12-01-2017, 04:24 PM
» Replies: 10
» Views: 3,022
Q&A
Forum: Answering BORG questions
Last Post: CA4Now
10-28-2017, 12:11 PM
» Replies: 17
» Views: 2,784
partial
Forum: Clues in the Case - May 2001
Last Post: jameson245
10-22-2017, 04:58 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 239
looking for the web
Forum: Broken window/ Spider web
Last Post: Gemini6
10-20-2017, 12:59 PM
» Replies: 13
» Views: 2,416
Important info in "We hav...
Forum: We Have Your Daughter
Last Post: Summer Dawn
10-19-2017, 07:24 PM
» Replies: 12
» Views: 1,619
Kirsten Hatfield
Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds
Last Post: jameson245
10-18-2017, 06:54 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 83
Jennifer Schuett
Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds
Last Post: jameson245
10-18-2017, 05:43 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 78
Charles Lindbergh - 1932
Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds
Last Post: jameson245
10-18-2017, 05:37 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 62
Polly Klaas
Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds
Last Post: jameson245
10-18-2017, 05:36 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 64

 
  Christmas Night
Posted by: jameson245 - 04-26-2017, 04:21 PM - Forum: Christmas Day, 1996 - Replies (1)

I have seen some photos taken at Fleet White's house on Christmas night.  Patsy in her red sweater and plaid jacket, John in his black sweater and kacky pants.  And a very tired Daphne and JonBenet playing on the floor with that bead making set.  They both looking absolutely exhausted.  Dazed.  Looking at the camera. No smiles left, so tired.  And what did I notice that made me smile?  They were both barefoot.  Childhood personified.  Christmas tree there, gifts and fun and family all around, exhausted , playing.

It should have been a wonderful memory.

Hard to look at the images and think she had just hours left to live.

Print this item

  Roscoe Clark
Posted by: jameson245 - 04-25-2017, 10:53 AM - Forum: Absolutely insane posts - mostly by BORG - Replies (8)

OK, after reading this guys garbage for a year, I have to make a comment.  YES, he has contact with John Ramsey.  YES, he wants John to give him evidence (which John doesn't possess) in order for his nifty-difty new DNA machine to process promising it will come up with an actual IMAGE of the killer.  Yes, John is cordial to him - - John is cordial to everyone (as evidenced on the Larry King Live show when he sat across the table from Steve Thomas and didn't go for his throat.

So he has a page and an audience and some think he is so smart.  Well, I think he is a total fraud.

I asked him to let me submit a blind sample to him - - I would of course know the identity of the source of good DNA and would share that with 5 other people before he did his testing - - let's see how close his image is.  He didn't even respond to the challenge.  I think he hasn't got a real lab and can't do what he says.  He's a man with some sharp ideas, maybe a shop at his house - - but a scientist this man is NOT!

OK, having said that, here is part of his insane theory.  (I promise the evidence does not fit his story.)

He wrote,

"Jonbenet Investigation added 6 new photos.
· April 20 at 5:21pm ·
The intruder that turn into a killer after the 911 call for help got him self lock inside a remodeled elevator shaft after the police search the basement. He had to pry him self out of this space. A broken Red knife was located in the basement.
Profile
After the police tried to open the wine cellar door that had the killer and JonBenet inside this room, the killer left this room soon after the police search the basement and went back upstairs.
Soon as posible the killer exited the wine cellar and as the killer was looking at the basement windows as a possible exit point, a neighbor came walking down the basement steps calling out JonBenet's name.
The killer had to quickly find a hidding place and entered the remodeled elevator shaft space in the train room.
The self closing and self locking door closed and lock him inside this room. There was no inside way to open the door, this was a safty door for the elevator shaft.
When the basement was cleared of people, the killer found himself lock inside this steel door and frame room. He had to pry himself self out with a red knife. He left fresh damage to the painted surfaces. This was reported to the police by John Ramsey that morning.
By this time the police move the people in the house to the Den and the sun room. The basement steps could not be seen from these two locations, the killer simply walk up the basement steps, turn right and exited out the left open and unlock butler kitchen door.
A neighbor seen a tall, brown hair, white male run very fast from the side yard, this was after the police was there at the home for some time.
The killer was still in the house when the police search the basement.
Case fact.
Frost and snow covered the Ramsey's property the early morning at 6 am.
The police with their flashlights search the yard for any signs for foot prints in the snow and frost. There was no track. Case facts.
Why?
Because the killer was still in the basement just like JonBenet was in the wine cellar.
Now you know more about this case.
Team JBI"


My comment - his case facts are fiction.  Don't buy it.

Print this item

  The author has a past
Posted by: jameson245 - 04-23-2017, 04:52 PM - Forum: The Coldest Case: Who Killed JonBenet Ramsey - No Replies

Kerns resigns from Legislature

Published: February 19, 2004

[Image: a8c46fbad5b869fd8c53213d16b9671b-f4c1838...8571428571]

CONCORD (AP) - A 23-year-old state representative who faced possible expulsion from the Legislature resigned Thursday rather than defend himself against charges he abused his office. Bedford Rep. John Kerns submitted a two-sentence letter that was read on the House floor and was met by applause. "I'm very sad to leave the House. I really feel that I belong there," Kerns said afterward.

Kerns faced three ethics charges against him: passing a bad check with "State of New Hampshire" written on it; using his title to get a parking spot reserved for school officials; and threatening them when told to stop parking there.

He also faced four criminal charges of passing bad checks.

"It was a good resolution to a tough situation for everyone involved," said House Speaker Gene Chandler. "I think it was in his best interest, certainly. It was the first admission he needs to look at his situation."

Kerns claimed he has a medical condition that caused his behavior, but never provided documentation to prove it.

The legislative Ethics Committee voted unanimously Wednesday to recommend that the House expel him. The House scheduled a vote on the recommendation March 13. If the House had agreed, Kerns would have been the first representative to be expelled since 1913.

Committee members said Kerns' refusal to take responsibility for his actions weighed heavily in their decision. They noted in their report to legislative leaders that he had demonstrated no remorse for his inappropriate conduct, failed to acknowledge that his acts reflected negatively on the Legislature and provided no assurance he would refrain from the behavior in the future.


Kerns had asked a judge last week to suspend the proceedings. He repeatedly has said he is undergoing treatment for a serious neurological illness. He also said he would ask the Legislature for an indefinite leave of absence, but did not follow through.

The committee tried to resolve the issue informally with Kerns, but Kerns did not show up at any committee meetings or at last week's hearing into the charges against him. In its report, the committee acknowledged the seriousness of the situation. "Removal from an elected position is a punishment to be administered only in the most egregious circumstances," the committee said. "Indeed, no one has been removed in such a manner from the New Hampshire House since 1913. But, the conduct of Representative Kerns warrants such an action, not simply because he has abused the trust placed in him by the public, but because he apparently believes that he is entitled to engage in such misconduct."

Clifford Snow of Manchester was the last lawmaker expelled from the House. He was charged with taking bribes in exchange for votes. In 1998, the House voted to censure Rep. Roland Hemon, a Democrat from Dover, for repeatedly filing legislation to impeach the judge that handled his mother's probate case.

Kerns, a University of New Hampshire student, also faces criminal charges of passing four bad checks in Dover. If convicted, he faces up to four years in prison.
This article appears in the April 14 2017 issue of New Hampshire Business Review



And from a google listing...  

hampshire state representative John Kerns (r-new Bedford) was accused of ethics violations in 2004 for bouncing bad checks and threatening a business owner if the man complained. the twenty-three-yearold Kerns also bounced a $3,995 .



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This was brought to my attention and i feel I need to address it here.

I bought the book, told Johnny he had a lot of mistakes and privately helped him with corrections.  Glad another NON-BORG book was out there but was not impressed by his knowledge or research skills.  I think I worded my posts on his thread pretty carefully.  But I did NOT investigate his past and am sorry now I did not.

He wanted me to send him a lot of my files, Lou's stuff, photos, other things.  I did not.  Later he snarked at me and asked who did I think I was denying him, an EXPERT, access to my files.  I laughed and asked what he was an expert in because it sure isn't Ramsey.  He posted misleading information on this site and I did the rest of the research and filled his thread on John San Agustin.  He decided to leave the site and I was glad as I deleted his membership.

I don't care if he is BORG or IDI - I will not pretend to support him or his research or his claims to evidence I know he does not have.

I will also tell you I have yet to receive the second, UPDATED (fixed) book.  That being the case, I wouldn't trust him to send a copy to anyone and I apologize to those who trusted him and now feel ripped off.

Print this item

  Why Hunter did not go forward
Posted by: jameson245 - 04-17-2017, 12:38 PM - Forum: Grand Jury Indictments - No Replies

"I and my prosecution task force believe we do not have sufficient evidence to warrant a filing of charges against anyone who has been investigated at this time," Hunter told the reporters assembled outside the Boulder County Justice Center on Oct. 13, 1999.



The bottom line is that the grand jury was shown evidence over the course of many months - - more than a year.  (90-99% of what they were shown or told was BORG.    Questions were put to witnesses in any way the BORG persecutors wanted - spinning allowed for sure.  Witnesses bringing in evidence of an intruder (and that would be Lou Smit who FORCED his way in by going to the courts) were treated with clear disrespect.  
There is a saying a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich - - and in this case they proved the saying to be true.  They indicted people who they were  - - - coerced into indicting for SOMETHING!

But the job of the District Attorney is to watch over this proceedings and know "the rest of the story" - - and to follow up ONLY on a case he believes he can win.

For example, the "evidence", theory, opinion, brain fart of one Donald Foster could have been presented as good evidence from a respectable EXPERT.  (He didn't appear in person but his information may have been.)  But the DA knew "the rest of the story".  Hunter knew Foster had written a letter to the Ramseys saying he knew they were innocent - would stake his reputation on it.  Hunter knew that Foster had identified another person as the killer - - he had a file an inch think on the "work" of Donald Foster.

He knew the man touted as the "key witness" was not a good witness, would be discredited immediately had he been brought in to a real trial.

Hunter also knew that the suspects WANTED to be called in to speak to the grand jury - - and were denied.

Hunter was not working in a vacuum - - he had a panel of advisers who gave him a list of the clear problems he would face if there was an arrest made based on what was shared in that grand jury room.  

HUNTER would have looked the fool and there would NOT be any conviction based on those problems.

Hunter made the right decision and refused to move forward with the prosecution of people who were the targets of a witch hunt and not guilty parties based on the evidence.

Print this item

  1/28/2013 - jurors talking
Posted by: jameson245 - 04-17-2017, 12:25 PM - Forum: Grand Jury Indictments - Replies (1)

JonBenet Ramsey grand jury voted to indict parents in 1999, but DA refused to prosecute
By Charlie Brennan
Posted: 01/28/13, 12:01 AM EST

On a brilliantly clear autumn day more than 13 years ago, Boulder District Attorney Alex Hunter stepped to the podium before an anxious media horde to announce that the grand jury investigation into the death of JonBenet Ramsey had come to an end.

"I and my prosecution task force believe we do not have sufficient evidence to warrant a filing of charges against anyone who has been investigated at this time," Hunter told the reporters assembled outside the Boulder County Justice Center on Oct. 13, 1999.

Yet multiple sources, including members of the grand jury, have now confirmed to the Daily Camera what Hunter did not say that day: The grand jury voted to indict both John and Patsy Ramsey on charges of child abuse resulting in death in connection with the events of Christmas night 1996 -- but Hunter refused to sign the indictment, believing he could not prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.

One legal expert, however, believes Colorado law may have obligated Hunter to at least sign the indictment, even if he elected not to prosecute the case.

Advertisement

"We didn't know who did what," one juror told the Camera, "but we felt the adults in the house may have done something that they certainly could have prevented, or they could have helped her, and they didn't."

Boulder attorney Bryan Morgan, who represented John Ramsey through the conclusion of the grand jury process, said Saturday, "If what you report actually happened, then there were some very professional and brave people in Alex's office and perhaps elsewhere whose discipline and training prevented a gross miscarriage of justice."

Former Boulder First Assistant District Attorney Bill Wise was among those confirming the jury's vote.

"It names both of them, John and Patsy Ramsey," said Wise, who was Hunter's top assistant for 28 years but did not participate in the grand jury process.

Child abuse resulting in death, when charged as "knowingly or recklessly," is a Class II felony that carries a potential sentence of four to 48 years in prison. The statute of limitations on that charge in Colorado is three years from the date of the crime.

Legal experts are unsure whether Hunter's decision not to sign the indictment agrees with Colorado grand jury law.

In an email, University of Colorado Law School professor Mimi Wesson, who has followed the Ramsey case over the years, wrote, "The Colorado statute governing grand jury practice says ... that '(e)very indictment shall be signed' by the foreman of the grand jury and the prosecuting attorney."

In the event that the grand jury voted to indict on charges that Hunter did not believe he could prove at trial, Wesson said it is her opinion that proper legal procedure would have been to sign the document, file it with the court and then move in open court to dismiss the charges.

"That would be the more transparent and responsible course, in my opinion," Wesson wrote.

Hunter, who left office in 2001 after 28 years as Boulder County's district attorney, declined to discuss the grand jury's actions, but he did issue the following statement last week via email:

"Colorado statutes, the ethical canons which govern the practice of law, and the Boulder District Court's oaths, instructions and orders in the JonBenet Ramsey grand jury proceedings, are well established and absolutely clear with respect to the various participants' legal obligations, duties and responsibilities, including the inviolate secrecy of the proceedings and the differing burdens of proof applicable to jurors and prosecutors.

"As the duly elected district attorney at the time and as an officer of the court then and now, I must respectfully decline further comment."

Boulder police Chief Mark Beckner also would not discuss the Ramsey grand jury.

"I'm sworn in, and I can't say anything about the grand jury," Beckner said. "I would be violating my oath of secrecy and I can't do that."

Denver criminal defense lawyer and legal analyst Dan Recht pointed out that the standard of proof for a grand jury to indict, which is probable cause, is a far lower threshold than what Hunter would have had to meet at trial.

"It couldn't be more different in a jury trial," Recht added. "So what Alex Hunter was thinking about was, 'But can I prove this beyond a reasonable doubt?' Because that's the burden that the prosecution has at a trial. So he seemingly decided, 'I am not going to be able to prove this child abuse resulting in death beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury.'"

'Somebody did something pretty horrible'

Jurors confirming the vote to the Camera -- who agreed to talk only on the condition of anonymity -- nevertheless acknowledged continuing uncertainty about what really went on in the middle of the night in the house at what was then known as 755 15th St., and is now 749 15th St.

"It's still unresolved," one juror said. "Somebody did something pretty horrible that wasn't punished.

"I'm not saying that I am at peace. But I had sympathy with his (Hunter's) decision. I could see the problem that he was in. I could understand what he was doing."

The Ramseys and their now-adult son Burke were exonerated in the case in July 2008 by then-District Attorney Mary Lacy, based on updated analysis of DNA samples from JonBenet's clothing -- although numerous prosecutors labeled her doing so as both unusual and questionable.

Former Ramsey attorney Morgan, however, said, "In the intervening years, the techniques for retrieving and testing DNA improved to the point where it conclusively demonstrated the Ramseys' innocence. "

Still, one juror who spoke with the Camera expressed a feeling of still not being completely reconciled with Hunter's decision. But the juror added that, perceiving that it would be a difficult case to try, Hunter's declining to sign the indictment, also known as a true bill, was understandable.

And, the juror said, "I think I did believe that they would get more evidence and figure out who did it."

Another grand juror who confirmed the vote said, "I think I have conquered the feeling of any acute frustration.

"This is what we thought, and that's what you (the prosecutors) asked us for, and that's what we gave you, our opinion," the juror added. "That was our job, and the rest of the legal procedure, they just do with it what has to be done."

Several grand jurors declined to comment on their vote. One, in doing so, said, "Our job was to try to come up with, to help solve, this crime.

"It has not been solved yet, and we are still under oath to keep silent and I would like to honor that. And I still have all the hope that, in the coming years, this crime will be solved properly."

'Not enough evidence to file'

Because under Colorado law grand jury proceedings are secret, and those participating in the process are sworn to uphold that secrecy, few directly involved would discuss the case on the record. Several agreed to talk, although not all did so for attribution.

Wise did not participate directly in the grand jury proceedings. But he learned of the results after its conclusion, and he defends Hunter's decision not to press forward with a prosecution.

"I absolutely do" believe Hunter made the right decision, said Wise, who is now retired. "And I thought it was a pretty courageous decision, because I know about the public pressure that was being put on everybody who was involved -- but particularly the elected district attorney."

Bob Grant at that time was the district attorney for neighboring Adams County. Grant was among a small group of local prosecutors with whom Hunter met monthly. He used those colleagues as advisers throughout the case, which drew rapt attention from an international audience, spawned more than a dozen books and a television movie, and has ultimately proved to be one of the nation's most enduring criminal mysteries.

"It is a case that has stuck with me for decades now because no one has been held accountable for the murder of a young child," Grant said in a recent interview.

Grant would not confirm or deny the grand jury's actions, citing the secrecy rules.

However, Grant said, "Had there been a question of whether to sign a document or not, I would have been among those advising not to indict, because I did not believe there was a winnable case based on the evidence at that time."

Wise said that those advising Hunter were not all of one mind when the decision was made.

"I would say there was not unanimity, or a unanimous decision, by anyone," Wise said. "I know of at least one, and possibly two (prosecutors), who felt it should have been filed, period, end of discussion. And I know of at least two, if not more than two, probably four, that thought there was not enough evidence to file."

Juror: Process was 'traumatic'

The grand jury process is predicated on a veil of secrecy such that Hunter, in his news conference at its conclusion, said, "Under no circumstances will I or any of my advisers, prosecutors, the law enforcement officers working on this case or the grand jurors discuss grand jury proceedings today or ever, unless ordered by the court."

The grand jurors who have nevertheless now spoken about their Ramsey experience take pride in their service to the judicial system.

"I actually believe that I did a good job with being able to pay attention to the actual evidence that was said," one juror said of the grand jury experience. "I didn't go in there with my mind made up, one way or the other."

That juror talked about being bothered by seeing a disparity between what was presented as evidence and what was being reported outside the courthouse by insatiable media.

Jurors even in routine cases are typically cautioned to avoid media coverage, and the juror said that was the case for the Ramsey grand jury -- but only at first.

"At the beginning, they said, 'Don't look at the media.' But this was a year-and-a-half we were doing this, so some time not long after the beginning, they said, 'We really can't ask you not to look at the media. There is too much stuff going on.'"

And so, the juror said, "The instructions sort of changed to, 'What you need to pay attention to is what's said in this room. You've already seen how much out there is not true. Pay attention to what is said inside this room because this is evidence we can back up. And things that are said outside aren't that way.' They expected us to be grownups about it, if you will."

While speculation was rampant outside the Boulder County Justice Center about what might be going on in the grand jury room, for the eight women and four men deciding the case, the work was both sobering and draining.

"It was pretty traumatic," a juror said. "It was a horrible event, and to really have to delve into all of the evidence and know what happened and get details was difficult.

"The reality is it was a horrible thing, and I didn't have the luxury of picking and choosing what I would pay attention to. I needed to know what happened in every detail, so it was difficult. So many people had been traumatized by this, and hurt, and scared."

Another juror commented on fears that family members might "disown" the juror over that juror's refusal to discuss the ongoing work with relatives.

But that juror was honored to be part of the process.

"I thought, and believe, that they were presenting all of the relevant information we needed to make a decision like that, and that's all we did," said the juror.

As for Hunter's decision not to go forward with a prosecution, the juror said, "That's the way it goes. I don't have any thoughts on what should or should not have been done.

"That's why we, the people, put him there. Alex Hunter was, and is, a very, very intelligent person. It was interesting, and rewarding, being part of the legal justice system."

Wise, Hunter's former top assistant, defended the ultimate decision not to press forward, in part because prosecution would have been difficult with two defendants.

"When you have a true bill that says two people were involved, but it doesn't say what the involvement of the people was, all a good defense attorney has to do is to separate their trials ... and, all of a sudden, you've got nothing," Wise said.

"You're operating under the theory that two people might have been responsible for the death ... and when you separate them, you don't know which of the two people was responsible for what. And so I thought it was the right decision."

More recently, Boulder prosecutors were successful in prosecuting a high-profile child abuse resulting in death case; Alex and Molly Midyette, of Louisville, were indicted by a grand jury and tried in the death of their infant son Jason, who died in 2006. Both were convicted, although Alex Midyette was found guilty of the lesser charge of "criminally negligent" child abuse, which is a Class III felony.

Wise acknowledged that in Hunter's time in office, felony trials were not routinely pursued, and rarely did one go forward if the evidence was shaky.

"Absolutely," Wise said. "That is the way we operated in that office for years and years and years.

"We never steamrolled ahead on a case that has less than adequate evidence, to at least have a feeling that you can get a conviction. If that feeling didn't exist, we didn't file the case. We never steamrolled a case."

Ramsey case forever unresolved?

With Lacy's exoneration of the Ramseys and their son, Burke, in 2008, and the news now that a grand jury in 1999 determined that both parents should face charges, plus the false arrest in 2006 of a confessed intruder suspect, John Mark Karr, and death that same year of Patsy Ramsey, a key witness no matter who the defendant, a case that has seemed star-crossed from the first day might appear farther than ever from seeing a firm resolution.

Current Boulder District Attorney Stan Garnett, upon taking office for his first term in January 2009, announced he was returning the Ramsey case -- which Lacy had taken over from the police department -- back to the police. And it is with the Boulder Police Department that the Ramsey case now resides.

"The Boulder police are in charge of the investigation, and if the state of the evidence changes to where charges can be filed consistent with Colorado ethical standards for prosecution, I will do so and will say whatever I have to say about this case on the record and in open court," Garnett said recently. "I will have no comment otherwise about the state of the evidence."

Referring to Lacy's exoneration of the Ramseys, Garnett said, "As I have said before, the exoneration speaks for itself. But all that matters to me as district attorney is the evidence, and where it leads. We'll follow the evidence wherever it leads us."

Wise and Grant both question the validity of Lacy's exoneration, and they say Garnett -- and his successors -- are not bound by it.

"It's more inappropriate than anything else," Grant said. "It's not a prosecutorial duty to exonerate people. It's a prosecutorial duty to seek justice and to prosecute the bad guys. If you don't have a bad guy to prosecute, don't exonerate people who are at least peripherally under suspicion. I didn't think it was appropriate at all."

Many observers, taking note of the many problems and conflicts that have plagued the case over the years, have theorized that it could now never successfully be prosecuted, short of a confession backed by corroborating DNA evidence.

But Garnett rules nothing out.

"In my first term, we made cold case prosecution a priority," Garnett said, "and in Ryan Brackley, I have one of the best cold case prosecutors in the United States on my staff. Certainly, the Ramsey case is one of the cold cases we would take great satisfaction in solving and filing and pursuing in court."

A juror, reflecting on the grand jury experience, and Hunter's decision not to prosecute the indictment, emphasized that the entire matter has long been out of the jurors' hands.

"I believe and feel our effort was well executed, the results of which were, as they say, pro bono publico, for the public good," the juror said.

"You say, 'Our job was well done, we gave them an opinion.' What happened after that, we went through all that and you find out that the bottom line was the district attorney felt there wasn't enough evidence to proceed with any further effort in this regard.

"Can he do that? Yes, he most certainly can."

Contact Camera Staff Writer Charlie Brennan at 303-473-1327 or brennanc@dailycamera.com.

Print this item

  20 loci new standard
Posted by: jameson245 - 04-16-2017, 07:42 PM - Forum: DNA -New testing - 2017 - No Replies

Twenty CODIS Core Loci

In early 2015, the FBI announced that the validation project for additional CODIS Core Loci had been completed and that an additional seven loci would be added to the CODIS Core effective January 1, 2017.3 The additional seven loci—D1S1656, D2S441, D2S1338, D10S1248, D12S391, D19S433 and D22S1045—along with the original 13 loci, will comprise the new CODIS Core Loci. Below is a listing of the 20 CODIS Core Loci.

  • CSF1PO
  • D3S1358
  • D5S818
  • D7S820
  • D8S1179
  • D13S317
  • D16S539
  • D18S51
  • D21S11
  • FGA
  • TH01
  • TPOX
  • vWA
  • D1S1656 (effective January 1, 2017)
  • D2S441 (effective January 1, 2017)
  • D2S1338 (effective January 1, 2017)
  • D10S1248 (effective January 1, 2017)
  • D12S391 (effective January 1, 2017)
  • D19S433 (effective January 1, 2017)
  • D22S1045 (effective January 1, 2017)


  • This does NOT mean all earlier DNA profiles will be eliminated from the system.  In many cases, the evidence was destroyed during testing and there is no way to test for more. 
  • The news stories made it clear they plan to test more evidence in the case - and more suspects need to be tested.

  • But it is true the newer tests will include more LOCI and I hope some of the news tests done here will have all 20.

Print this item

  For Sherry Burgett Hilliard
Posted by: jameson245 - 04-16-2017, 06:33 PM - Forum: Answering BORG questions - No Replies

Thanks for submitting the question.  I will be happy to respond.

Your question:   What has SHE done for this case other than benefit financially?

My Answer: Well, let's see what I have done.

1997, not long after the murder, I joined a forum and tried to be a voice of calm and reason.  I asked people to wait for the evidence to be shared before anyone go crazy and lynch the parents.  I tried to find evidence of prior abuse and neglect, history of alcohol or drug use, some motive like insurance payout or custody dispute.  I found nothing.

I posted that JonBenet's name was not in the ransom note and that caught the attention of the police since very few knew that fact to be true.

I got the attention of LE and on the list of things TO DO, locating me was on  the list given to Lou Smit the day he was hired. 

I later told LE that a third weapon was involved - other than the garotte and what was used to hit her in the head.   That turned out to be the stun gun.

I was privately lured into a discussion with a college professor and later found out he had - - as an "EXPERT", decided I was the killer - he let the cops know and he advised NEWSWEEK Magazine to hold the front page for the reveal.  The headline was to be "Paging JonBenét's killer."

I said nothing to anyone about that episode - - - quickly cleared my name.  By then I was leading one of the biggest Ramsey forums going.  I think it was important to have that discussion alive and telling the truth.  Not allowing the garbage I see posted unchallenged on facebook, topix and other sites.

Moving on.  I hosted a very GOOD group, we found a lot of TRUTH and shared with all.

When I got to meet the Ramseys, go into the murder house - - I shared that with ALL.  Acandyrose still has some of my photos taken inside the house on her site.

I acted as a go-between for people who wanted to get information to the investigators.  Some could do it on their own but others found closed doors.  When I felt a suspect really was a GOOD suspect, I could make a phone call and talk to someone immediately.  Sometimes that was LE like Lou Smit, sometimes LE outside Boulder.  And when I felt it was the right thing to do, it was media.  I made a lot of contacts.  Some may have disliked me but most had to admit they respected me because I wasn't telling lies - my information was GOOD.

So when Steve Thomas had his key witness going into the grand jury and I found out it was that college professor - - - I stepped up and went to Boulder to let the DA know the witness was a charlatan, a fraud.  The DA wouldn't leave his office to speak with me and I wouldn't leave the file without seeing him - - - so I went on 48 Hours and - - - according to several books  - Foster was toast.  I am very proud that I stopped that false witness from taking a mother from her child.

So I had a forum and I fought to publish the facts.  I am the one who made deposition transcripts available for everyone.  I got hold of the FAX between Miller and Hoffman and published that.      I published crime scene photos that no one else had.  I got a book removed from the printing presses and saw it replaced with transcripts of the Ramsey interviews.  (Some errors in there but a far better book than was planned.)

I spent HOURS transcribing TV shows so we would have transcripts to discuss on the forums.

I have traveled to several states to review evidence the BORG swore would have me jumping the fence.  They were always wrong.

I have traveled to a few states and met with people here or worked with them online to develop detailed files on suspects.  No, no one was aware of that as - - - only one person killed JonBenet and I don't put names out there at all.  If a name was not in the media or brought out by someone else, I protected the names.   But my efforts have seen probably a half dozen good and reasonable suspects forever CLEARED - - sometimes by DNA.

I have worked as a consultant to many reporters, a few documentary makers.  I have "edited" a few books.  I have kept many confidences - - I am good at keeping confidences.

I have put up my own money for a small reward and to pay for an ad in the Boulder papers to remind people this is not over.

I started a GoFundMe campaign to remind people that this is not over - - - and I know the money can and will help clear more suspects.  I can only hope it will also identify the killer.

I keep reading, making calls, seeking the truth, asking questions and building files that one day make be the seed needed to make a call to LE or media.  I keep trying.  My work is far from over.  And that is why I reactivated WebbSleuths.org.

Can I ask what YOU do to help see this case solved?  I know you flame me a lot, in an area where I don't post.  You don't know much of anything and choose to believe the negative stuff you find on BORG forums - kind of a stupid thing to do - and I really don't care.  But you asked a real question so I decided to answer.


Hope you have a great Easter - Mine was wonderful, surrounded by family and food and good conversation.  I will be talking with Ramsey people-who-matter next week and...... I hope I answered your question and you can go back to flaming knowing - - - I really don't care.  Your lack of information and understanding shows who YOU are.  My past contributions to the case stand witness to who I am.

As for the "evidence" against me online - - are you so naïve you believe that crap?  Really?  You don't know people can and do edit chat logs and reprint them as real?  You don't know people misquote others and simply make stuff up?

According to one BORG myth, I nearly committed suicide once at a big fancy dinner party - jealous because one of the people at the dinner had a girlfriend?     The next morning I went on camera looking (according to some) pretty good in the 48 Hours show.  The poster who reported my bloody attack on myself (I don't remember if I was at the table or on it)  went to Boulder later, according to her posts,  to sleep with all the Ramsey people I had - - I laughed, her trip was going to be boring because I don't cheat on my husband.  Well, I hear she went out there and cheated on HER husband - - but that's her story to tell.

Hope you have a good Easter - mine was great, as usual.  Life is good, my efforts in Ramsey are earnest and I am pleased with seeing the suspect growing shorter. The BORG is like some sewer spill a few towns away, not my problem.

But I got sent your question and thought -- - why not?  So here's your answer.  And I wonder if you are really as proud of your efforts in Ramsey as I am in mine.

Print this item

  Jessica Lunsford
Posted by: jameson245 - 04-15-2017, 08:14 PM - Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds - No Replies

In his confession, Couey said that he entered Lunsford's house through an unlocked door at about three o'clock in the morning, awakened Lunsford, told her "Don't yell or nothing", and told her to follow him out of the house.[3] He occupied a trailer along with two women, some 100 yards (91 m) away, at the time of Lunsford's abduction.[4] He admitted in a videotaped and recorded deposition to raping Lunsford in his bedroom. Lunsford was kept in Couey's bed that evening, where he raped her again in the morning. Couey put her in his closet and ordered her to remain there, which she did as he reported for work at "Billy's Truck Lot".[3] Three days after he abducted her, Couey tricked Jessica into getting into two garbage bags by saying he was going to 'take her home'. He instead buried her alive as he decided he could do nothing else with the girl. He said he 'Didn't want people seeing him and Lunsford across the street.'

Print this item

  Announcing the new tests
Posted by: jameson245 - 04-15-2017, 06:35 PM - Forum: DNA -New testing - 2017 - Replies (9)

http://www.9news.com/news/investigations.../369627640

Print this item

  Why they don't give interviews
Posted by: jameson245 - 04-15-2017, 06:25 PM - Forum: Fleet and Priscilla White - No Replies

This is from the order sealing Fleet White's deposition


"....if Mr . White participated in a televised
interview in which he discussed the issue of culpability for the
death of JonBenet Ramsey, any party could move to unseal the
videotaped deposition."


I guess talking to the city counsel doesn't count as an interview.  But no, he wasn't talking about anyone being responsible for the murder. 

I have not listened to his interviews with Peter Boyles - - but I thought Boyles was spinning something.  I really don't know.  Anyone following that show?

Print this item