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

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 31
» Latest member: SundanceIM
» Forum threads: 1,099
» Forum posts: 3,423

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 16 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 16 Guest(s)

Latest Threads
From Brill's Content
Forum: Footprints in the snow
Last Post: SundanceIM
03-29-2018, 07:55 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 312
from Thomas deposition in...
Forum: Barbie nightgown
Last Post: jameson245
03-15-2018, 06:04 PM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 1,562
Dr. Oz - Nancy Grace - Ju...
Forum: What is in the news - staying up to date
Last Post: jameson245
03-15-2018, 05:56 PM
» Replies: 3
» Views: 550
Burke lawsuit
Forum: Burke sues Werner Spitz for $150,000,000.00
Last Post: jameson245
03-15-2018, 05:53 PM
» Replies: 4
» Views: 517
Obituary
Forum: Peter Hofstrom
Last Post: jameson245
02-20-2018, 12:34 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 171
John Phillips
Forum: Opinions
Last Post: jameson245
01-31-2018, 03:54 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 283
Lin Wood says CBS is goin...
Forum: Burke sues CBS for 750 million
Last Post: jameson245
01-18-2018, 07:22 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 360
news story
Forum: John and Barbara Fernie
Last Post: Dispatcher
01-09-2018, 11:08 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 581
What they should have kno...
Forum: The CBS suit
Last Post: CA4Now
01-09-2018, 12:01 PM
» Replies: 11
» Views: 3,341
Case to go forward - Janu...
Forum: Burke sues CBS for 750 million
Last Post: jameson245
01-06-2018, 03:26 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 214

 
  Our introduction to DNA-X
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-23-2017, 05:42 AM - Forum: DNA-X - Replies (3)

From Mark Beckner's deposition in Wolf v Ramsey

18 Q Has anyone matched the DNA from the scene?
19 A No.
20 Q Can you give me a ballpark figure of how
21 many individuals have submitted DNA?
22 A Well, back up a minute. There is more
23 than one sample of DNA. So specifically what are you
24 referring to?
25 Q Well, as I understand it, there is DNA and

121
1 I don't want to get technical here, but I understand
2 there was DNA found, foreign DNA, found under the
3 fingernails on JonBent's left and right hands; am I
4 right?
5 A Okay. Yes.
6 Q As I understand it, there was foreign DNA
7 found either on -- I'll just say on her underwear?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Now, I'm not aware as I sit here of any
10 other DNA. Was there any other?
11 A Yes.
12 Q Where was it?
13 A Well --
14 MR. MILLER: Just a minute.
15 THE DEPONENT: Yeah. We're getting into
16 evidence here.
17 MR. MILLER: I don't think you should
18 answer that question.
19 Q (BY MR. WOOD) I have to be able to know.
20 You raised the issue yourself about the different
21 areas of DNA. So I assume it has some relevance to
22 the subject matter that I'm asking you about in terms
23 of the tests done with Chris Wolf.
24 A You can certainly ask me if Chris Wolf
25 matched any DNA at the scene. I can answer that.

122
1 Q But I'm asking you about -- but I asked
2 you whether anyone else's did and you indicated
3 initially no. I said Do you know whether DNA -- I
4 believe you told me DNA tests were done or performed
5 with respect to Chris Wolf?
6 Yes; to the best of my recollection, yes.
7 Do you know the results?
8 Yes.
9 What were the results?
10 "Answer: He did not match the DNA from
11 the scene.
12 "Question: Has anyone matched the DNA
13 from the scene?
14 "Answer: No.
15 "Question: Can you give me a ballpark
16 figure of how many individuals have submitted DNA"
17 and you didn't answer that.
18 You said "Well, back up a minute. There
19 is more than one sample of DNA. So specifically what
20 are you referring to" was the question you posed to
21 me.
22 So that has relevance of your own inquiry
23 and so I need to find out what other DNA you're
24 referring to.
25 A When you asked the question, I'm thinking

123
1 the unknown DNA.
2 Q Well, I mean --
3 A I answered the question in that context.
4 Q Known DNA -- I'm talking about DNA foreign
5 to JonBent.
6 A Okay.
7 Q That's what I'm asking you about and
8 whether any of that has been matched, DNA found on
9 her, foreign to her, whether that was matched to
10 Chris Wolf?
11 A DNA found on her?
12 Q Or on her clothing.
13 A And the question is did that match to
14 Chris Wolf? The answer is no.
15 Q Has it matched, been matched to anyone?
16 A The DNA on JonBent?
17 Q And/or on her clothing?
18 A No.
19 Q Obviously you're telling me there was DNA
20 that was not on JonBen t or on her clothing; is that
21 correct?
22 A Correct.
23 Q Where was that?
24 A We're getting into areas where I feel like
25 we can't go.



 

jameson[Image: team_icon.gif]
Charter Member
9423 posts

Apr-10-03, 05:03 PM (EST)
[Image: mesg_add_buddy.gif]  
11. "RE: Mark Beckner's deposition"
In response to message #10
 
  
124
1 Q Well, I'm trying to figure out what was
2 done with Chris Wolf, and then obviously I'm trying
3 to find out if it's been matched with anyone since
4 that's the larger picture of the case in its
5 entirety. But I don't know what I'm getting if I
6 don't know what I'm asking about. You raised the
7 question, you've indicated there was DNA that was
8 found somewhere other than on her body or on her
9 clothing.
10 I had initially asked you about the crime
11 scene, I thought. Pull that back up. I asked you
12 specifically, you did not match the DNA from the
13 scene? Answer --
14 "Question: Has anyone matched the DNA
15 from the scene?
16 "Answer: No."
17 And you seem to be telling me now that you
18 want to modify that answer, that there was DNA from
19 the scene foreign to JonBent. And I'm asking you
20 where?
21 A What I'm saying is I am getting into
22 evidence that goes beyond Chris Wolf.
23 Q Well, was Chris Wolf's -- was Chris Wolf's
24 DNA tested against this other DNA that you say was
25 found at the scene that you don't want to tell me

125
1 about?
2 A Well, that wouldn't be accurate. Compared
3 against would be the accurate question.
4 Q Well, was it compared against?
5 A Yes.
6 Q Why would it be compared against if it had
7 already been identified as known?
8 A Well, again --
9 MR. MILLER: I don't think he can answer
10 this question.
11 Q (BY MR. WOOD) Well, the DNA evidence from
12 Mr. Wolf was obtained in February or March of 1998,
13 right?
14 A To the best of my recollection, yes.
15 Q Why would you have tested it, and maybe
16 you didn't, why would you have tested it against
17 foreign DNA that you had already had a match on from
18 someone else?
19 MR. MILLER: He didn't say he already had
20 a match on. That's why --
21 MR. WOOD: I may have been reading too
22 much in because he made reference to known DNA. And
23 I thought he was -- I was assuming that maybe they
24 had gotten a match and you knew the source.
25 A We have JonBent's DNA; that's known DNA.

126
1 Q (BY MR. WOOD) Right. And then you have
2 foreign DNA?
3 A Yes.
4 Q And the question was has any of the
5 foreign DNA, foreign to JonBen t, you have indicated
6 to me has not been matched to Chris Wolf?
7 A Correct.
8 Q And I asked you had it been matched to
9 anyone and you initially said no; is that correct?
10 A The DNA on her body or clothing, the
11 answer is no; that's right.
12 Q What about the crime scene?
13 A That's what I can't answer.
14 Q But here is the dilemma. I want to know
15 if whatever this we'll call it DNAX, okay, was Chris
16 Wolf's DNA compared to DNAX?
17 MR. MILLER: He answered that yes.
18 A Yes.
19 Q (BY MR. WOOD) Okay.
20 A I can tell you it does not match DNAX.
21 Q Right. At the time that Chris Wolf's DNA
22 was compared to DNAX, had it been compared to any
23 other DNA and found to be a match?
24 A Compared with other -- no, it's not
25 been -- his DNA has not been matched to anything at

127
1 the crime scene.

Print this item

  blue fibers
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-23-2017, 05:34 AM - Forum: Fiber and Hair Evidence - Replies (1)

from Mark Beckner's deposition in Wolf v Ramsey

there were blue fibers found on
11 the crime scene?
12 A Yes.
13 Q So do we know whether the fiber test was
14 conducted on the blue cotton sweater and, if so, the
15 results of whether there was any type of consistency
16 in the fibers with the fibers found at the crime
17 scene?
18 A That I don't know.
19 Q Fiber evidence in and of itself would not
20 eliminate any individual as being under suspicion,
21 would it?
22 A In what way?
23 Q In any way.
24 A Well, fiber evidence -- it's not evidence
25 if it's not a match. So what do you mean by

117
1 evidence?
2 Q When you say it's not a match, that's
3 loose. I mean matches are rare in fiber analysis,
4 aren't they? What you generally come up with --
5 A I don't know how rare they --
6 Q -- is consistent with, isn't that what you
7 generally get?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Okay. Because it would take a very unique
10 fiber to say that we can absolutely tell you that
11 this is a match?
12 A Yes.
13 Q That's a very rare, if ever, occurrence,
14 true?
15 A Yes.
16 Q So if I have got Chris Wolf and he's got a
17 blue cotton sweater and he submits that to the
18 authorities and you check and you say, okay, we've
19 got a fiber from this sweater of Mr. Wolf's and it's
20 consistent with the blue cotton fiber that we found
21 at the crime scene, that doesn't tell you that Chris
22 Wolf was involved in the murder, does it?
23 A No.

Print this item

  Vassar Professor Donald Foster
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-23-2017, 05:25 AM - Forum: Discredited and discounted witnesses in this case - Replies (16)

See my full page on him at http://www.jameson245.com/foster_page.htm

This is a quote from Police Chief Mark Beckner's deposition in the Wolf v Ramsey lawsuit.

93
1 Chief? The man is -- you've seen the three-page
2 letter. He has staked his career and reputation that
3 Patsy Ramsey didn't write the notes, she is
4 absolutely, unequivocally innocent and that he didn't
5 make those statements without being right and he
6 didn't reveal that information to the Boulder Police
7 Department before you all hired him and paid him
8 taxpayer money, and then he came up with an analysis
9 that said that it was impossible for anyone else to
10 have written the note except for Patsy Ramsey.
11 That contradiction and concealment has to
12 be significant enough that any report he submitted on
13 any other person could not be relied upon by the
14 department because you knew that he would be
15 subjected to having his credibility destroyed; isn't
16 that a fair statement?
17 A That's fair.

Print this item

  Steven Pitt
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-23-2017, 05:09 AM - Forum: BORG theories and BORG people of note - Replies (3)

From Beckner deposition in Wolf v Ramsey

80
1 Q There was -- you know who Steven Pitt is?
2 A Yes.
3 Q What was his role?
4 A He was a forensic psychologist that
5 assisted us in the case.
6 Q What would a forensic psychologist bring
7 to the table?
8 A Well, he brings a lot in terms of
9 analyzing behavior, demeanor, statements, advice on
10 how to conduct interviews, advice on what questions
11 to ask, those areas.
12 Q Would he have been involved in a strategy
13 to bring public pressure on a given individual who
14 was under suspicion?
15 MR. MILLER: Objection

long discussion on this - interesting since he appears later in documentaries....

Print this item

  Was Beckner BORG?
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-23-2017, 05:02 AM - Forum: BORG theories and BORG people of note - No Replies

from his deposition:

21 Q Would one of the factors in removing Chris
22 Wolf from under the umbrella of suspicion be the fact
23 that the Boulder Police Department had concluded that
24 it was probable that John Ramsey and Patsy Ramsey
25 were involved in the death of their daughter?

70
1 A No, I don't think so.
2 Q For example, if you as the chief of police
3 or as the commander in charge of the Ramsey
4 investigation state to your investigator or
5 investigators, members of your detective team, I
6 believe Patsy Ramsey killed JonBent, would you
7 expect that to have an impact on how that
8 investigator or detective would approach another
9 possible individual under suspicion such as Chris
10 Wolf?
11 A Would I expect it to? No.
12 Q Well, why not? I mean when the chief says
13 I believe Patsy Ramsey did this, how could that not
14 impact the efforts to investigate others?
15 MR. MILLER: Object to the form of the
16 question. Misstates testimony.
17 Q (BY MR. WOOD) Well, maybe I didn't lay
18 the foundation. Have you ever made that statement to
19 another detective in this case?
20 A I don't know, to be honest with you,
21 whether I have said that.
22 Q Well, Steve Thomas says in his book that
23 you did.
24 A Well, I don't know that I have.
25 Q Well, do you deny that?

71
1 A No. I don't know whether I have or not.
2 Q Well, does it sound like something that
3 you would have said to another detective?
4 A It may have been something that was said.
5 We've had, you know, hundreds of conversations about
6 hearings about this case. Maybe, I don't know. I
7 don't recall saying that specifically.
8 Q Well, I mean, Chief, that's not an
9 insignificant statement to come from the chief of
10 police or from the commander of the investigation. I
11 mean is it possible that you may have made similar
12 comments about other individuals?
13 A Sure.
14 Q That you believe some other person other
15 than John or Patsy might have been involved?
16 A Sure.
17 Q Do you have a recollection of doing that?
18 A I have a recollection of challenging
19 detectives in terms of some of the evidence and what
20 it means, sure.
21 Q But I'm really looking more for the
22 specific statement. I mean maybe that's the way, if
23 Thomas is accurate and says that Mark Beckner said I
24 believe Patsy Ramsey killed JonBent, would that have
25 been -- should that be interpreted as a statement of

72
1 your actual belief or is that a way that you might
2 challenge some findings or some information from a
3 detective? I'm not sure I'm following you.
4 A Yeah, because to this day I haven't come
5 to any conclusions on that. So what I would say is
6 it would probably be in the context of discussing
7 different theories about the case.
8 Q Because to this day, you have not
9 concluded yourself that Patsy Ramsey killed JonBen t?
10 A That's correct.

Print this item

  info from ...
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-23-2017, 04:56 AM - Forum: Prints - finger and palm - Replies (1)

from Mark Beckner's deposition in Wolf v Ramsey

3 Q (BY MR. WOOD) You indicated, Chief
4 Beckner, that in 1997 with respect to -- late 1997,
5 you submitted some handwriting and possibly some
6 fingerprints to CBI with respect to Chris Wolf.
7 We've covered the handwriting, haven't we, that we
8 talked about earlier that Chet Ubowski gave reports
9 on a couple of occasions?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Now, what about -- you say possibly some
12 fingerprints. Did you in fact obtain fingerprints
13 from Chris Wolf?
14 A Again, I just want to clarify I'm going by
15 memory from almost four years ago. But yes, I recall
16 that we had fingerprints from Chris Wolf.
17 Q And were they submitted to CBI?
18 A Yes.
19 Q For comparisons to what?
20 A To evidence taken at the scene. Any
21 fingerprints that we had, any prints whatsoever that
22 we had at the scene.
23 Q Okay. And did you ever -- well, you go on
24 to say you obtained some handwriting exemplars in
25 1998. That would have been different from the

59
1 initial handwriting?
2 A I believe so. I'm, you know --
3 Q And some palm prints --
4 A -- the best of my recollection.
5 Q Okay. Do you remember what the results
6 were that came back on the fingerprints from CBI with
7 respect to Mr. Wolf?
8 A No match.
9 Q Would I be safe then to say that across
10 the board that would be true?
11 A Yes.
12 Q If you had a match from someone you
13 wouldn't have expected to be in the house, we would
14 probably all know about it.
15 The palm print, again, you took a palm
16 print left and right from Mr. Wolf, submitted those
17 to CBI?
18 A I know we took palm prints.
19 Q Were they submitted to CBI?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Again, for comparison to what you believe
22 were palm prints taken from the crime scene?
23 A Yes.
24 Q Did you take both the left and the right
25 hand palm print from Mr. Wolf?

60
1 A I don't know for sure.
2 Q Do you know what you would have expected
3 to be done in that regard?
4 A Both, I would have expected.

Print this item

  COMPARE THE IMAGES! CBS LIED!
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-22-2017, 05:30 PM - Forum: Burke sues CBS for 750 million - Replies (3)

           

Print this item

  COMPARE THESE TWO IMAGES!
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-22-2017, 05:27 PM - Forum: Broken window/ Spider web - Replies (1)

       

This shows just how far CBS, Kolar and the others went to mislead the public!

Print this item

  Gurule and Dorrance - 2010
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-22-2017, 03:43 PM - Forum: Boulder crimes - Replies (1)

Men arrested in Boulder burglary could be linked to many more over 15 years
By Vanessa Miller Camera Staff Writer
Posted:   04/07/2010 08:42:11 PM MDT


[Image: 20100407_115753_NicholasDorrance_200.jpg]
Nicholas Dorrance (Boulder County Sheriff's Office)
Two men recently arrested on suspicion of breaking into a north Boulder home may have been behind dozens of residential burglaries in the city and other parts of the Denver metro area over the past 15 years, according to police.
Nicholas Dorrance, 46, and James P. Gurule, 45, were arrested March 27 on suspicion of second-degree burglary after witnesses saw them leaving Nassau Place in a white 2000 Ford Expedition about the same time a home on the street was burglarized, according to police.
The department issued an alert for the vehicle, and Westminster police and the Colorado State Patrol helped officers stop the men on U.S. 36 near Wadsworth Boulevard. Investigators found evidence in the SUV that linked the men to the break-in, and detectives suspect they've been committing burglaries for years.
[Image: 20100407_115836_JamesGurule_200.jpg]
James P. Gurule (Boulder County Sheriff's Office)
"We feel like this is going to be a significant arrest that allows us to give homeowners some answers in a lot of different cases," said Boulder police spokeswoman Sarah Huntley.
Detectives have found hundreds of items believed to be stolen, including jewelry, weapons and electronics.
Officers have matched up some of the found property with victims of previous burglaries. As for the rest of the items, officers are photographing them and plan to post the images on the department's Web site by the end of the week so victims can be reunited with their property, Huntley said. So far, the department has photographed more than 400 items, she said.
Advertisement

"The items likely come from burglaries that occurred in Boulder and other parts of the metro area, possibly stemming back from 15 years ago," Huntley said.
The suspected burglars are believed to have already sold many of the high-end items, Huntley said. But, she said, many of the items that police hope to reunite with their owners might have sentimental value.
One of the items, for example, is a bracelet that has charms on it seeming to signify children's ages, she said.
Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner said his department recently created a task force to focus on catching the residential burglars. He couldn't say how many crimes Dorrance and Gurule are suspected of being involved in, but he said their arrests were "satisfying" for the officers.
Both men have posted $20,000 bonds to be released from the Boulder County Jail. They couldn't be reached for comment Wednesday. They're due back in a Boulder County Jail courtroom today for the filing of charges.
Both Gurule and Dorrance have lengthy criminal histories in Colorado, according to court records, including previous arrests for theft, drugs and alcohol violations.

Print this item

  Discussion
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-22-2017, 01:11 PM - Forum: Burke sues CBS for 750 million - Replies (6)

Got this in email, was asked to post and say it is from "Dave"  (an old-time poster)

I watched the CBS hatchet job on Burke. This was nothing more than a
huge exercise in group confirmation bias --- as you yourself may have
concluded.

snip

post from a contributor, if you would be so kind. Please feel free to
say it's from "Dave" if you wish.

-------------------------------

On the CBS television show The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey, “pseudo-expert”
Henry Lee [1] performed DNA tests on some brand new underwear fresh off
the shelf. The test consisted of:

1) Spraying the underwear with chemicals to locate regions that
contained organic material.

2) Cutting out the identified regions.

3) Submitting the cuttings for DNA testing.

It was reported that female DNA was found.

This is an incompetently designed test.

What should have been done instead:

1) Randomly drop colored solution or other easily identifiable markings
no larger than 0.5 inches in diameter on the crotches of the underwear
--- no more than a few such drops per piece of underwear, similar in
size and distribution as the blood spots found on JonBenét's underwear.

2) Cut out these identified regions.

3) Submit the cuttings for testing for the presence of male DNA, not
female DNA.

Spraying the underwear with chemicals to locate regions that contain
organic material is a stupid mistake that shows the sloppiness that
“pseudo-expert” Henry Lee brings to many of his cases. The relevant
question is not: “Can we find DNA somewhere on these panties?” but
rather: “How likely is it that a spot of blood would land on a region
that contains DNA?”

Claiming that finding female DNA somewhere on the panties is significant
to the case is just another stupid and unfounded conclusion of
“pseudo-expert” Henry Lee. Throughout the history of the garment
industry, females dominate production. The likelihood of male DNA
landing on garments compared to the likelihood of female DNA is far, far
lower. Again, the question isn't “Can we find DNA somewhere on these
panties?” but rather: “How likely is it that any DNA found on the fresh
underwear is male?”

Even though this test is incompetently designed, the approximate
likelihood of finding male DNA in a region of 0.5 inches in diameter
that is randomly chosen can be confidently stated as ZERO, based on the
information provided in the show regarding this irrelevant test.
Nevertheless, now that this incompetently designed test has been not
only performed, but publicized in the popular press, it should be
replaced by a relevant test like the one that I have described above,
performed by competent personnel at an independent laboratory.

[1] The label "pseudo-expert" is an accurate description, in my opinion,
of Henry Lee from: STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE 3RD CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE
COUNTY OF WAYNE
BURKE RAMSEY, Plaintiff,
v.
CBS CORPORATION, CRITICAL CONTENT, LLC, JIM CLEMENTE, LAURA RICHARDS, A.
JAMES KOLAR, JAMES R. FITZGERALD, STANLEY B.BURKE, WERNER U. SPITZ, and
HENRY C. LEE, Defendants.

Print this item