We know Charlie Brenna was mislead and reversed himself more than once saying he had believed sources who had not been wrong in other stories.
He published that there were no footprints in the snow - - but the crime scene photos showed there was little to no snow on the south side of the house.
He published that John had been the pilot in the flight to Atlanta - but he was wrong there as well.
Use this thread to show examples like that.
Carol McKinley, Fox News confirming investigators telling her the shoe print, palm print and unidentified hair are all solved. The shoe print is Burke's, the palm print is Melinda's and the hair found on blanket is Patsy's.
Fox News, August 23, 2002
Well, we know they could NEVER prove the Hi-Tec print was from any footwear belonging to the Ramseys. That article of clothing could still be in someone's safekeeping and one day could surface to solve this.
We know the police were taking palm prints from people, neighbors and family and.... bottom line, I haven't seen any official document or IDENTIFIED LE person in front of a camera owning that statement. It certainly would not hurt the case for LE to say that one piece of evidence was sourced and is no longer of importance. But don't hold your breath waiting on that. I believe active investigators are still interested in sending in palmprints of their suspects just BECAUSE the prints remain unsourced.
And if the hair on the blanket was identified as belonging to Patsy, please tell me why Steve Thomas and his partnet traveled to NC to try to get a pubic hair from John Brewer Eustace.
Carol McKinley confirmed she was TOLD those things, not that she knew those to be facts supported by lab reports shared with her. Just gossip repeated as far as i can tell.