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

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 6
» Latest member: PeterSherri
» Forum threads: 1,759
» Forum posts: 5,600

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 32 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 32 Guest(s)

Latest Threads
9 pg notes
Forum: Linda Wickman
Last Post: jameson245
06-18-2021, 05:31 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 477
Professor Matrix v steve ...
Forum: Nancy Krebs
Last Post: jameson245
06-18-2021, 04:50 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 346
http://jonbenetramsey.pbw...
Forum: December 26th
Last Post: jameson245
06-15-2021, 10:50 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 2,495
Jane Stobie interview
Forum: Names to remember
Last Post: jameson245
06-02-2021, 07:53 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 495
Jane Stobie interview
Forum: Names to remember
Last Post: jameson245
06-02-2021, 07:53 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 296
MOre on Don Foster
Forum: Discredited and discounted witnesses in this case
Last Post: jameson245
05-19-2021, 07:23 PM
» Replies: 13
» Views: 9,889
Barbara Reffner aka A Can...
Forum: Names to remember
Last Post: jameson245
05-16-2021, 02:43 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 477
from 2021 blog
Forum: Fleet and Priscilla White
Last Post: jameson245
05-02-2021, 05:19 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 731
I met Rol
Forum: Rol Hoverstock
Last Post: jameson245
05-02-2021, 05:15 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 2,236
Melody and Luther Stanton...
Forum: Neighbors
Last Post: jameson245
05-02-2021, 05:08 PM
» Replies: 4
» Views: 7,701

 
  lawsuit news
Posted by: jameson245 - 05-08-2017, 11:44 AM - Forum: 2001 - Replies (6)

National News Briefs; Ramseys and Tabloid Settle JonBenet Lawsuit

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS    MARCH 9, 2001

John and Patsy Ramsey have settled a lawsuit against a supermarket tabloid over articles that suggested that their son, Burke, had molested and killed his sister, JonBenet.

Meanwhile today, the Ramseys' former housekeeper, Linda Hoffmann-Pugh, sued the couple in Atlanta, asserting that their book falsely named her as a suspect in the 1996 death of JonBenet. No one has been charged in the case.

Terms of the settlement with the tabloid, The Globe, were not disclosed, The Daily Camera newspaper of Boulder reported today.

Print this item

  Stephen Miles
Posted by: jameson245 - 05-08-2017, 11:27 AM - Forum: Names to remember - Replies (11)

Photographer sues Enquirer, Ramseys
Tabloid story leads to lawsuit
By MATT SEBASTIAN, Camera Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 4, 1998
Angered by tabloid reports accusing him of pedophilia and murder, a Boulder photographer filed a defamation suit Tuesday against John Ramsey and the National Enquirer.
Stephen Thomas Miles, 49, suffered "shunning, hatred, ridicule and contempt" as a result of an Enquirer article that reported Ramsey believed the photographer killed his 6-year-old daughter, JonBenet, according to the lawsuit. The suit did not seek a specific damage amount.
"This guy wouldn't kill a housefly," Miles' attorney, Lee Hill, said Tuesday.
The photographer - who does have a lengthy criminal history, primarily involving drugs - was attending to a sick parent Tuesday and unavailable for comment, Hill said.
Ramsey's civil attorney, Bill Gray, said Tuesday he wouldn't discuss pending litigation.
Hill, however, said he spoke to Gray earlier in the day and that he said Ramsey denies accusing Miles of the Dec. 26, 1996, killing of his daughter.
Representatives of the National Enquirer, based in southeast Florida, could not be reached for comment.
Suing for libel, slander and intentional infliction of emotional distress, Miles' complaint also names as defendants two of the tabloid's reporters, John South and David Wright.
The first of two articles Miles takes issue with ran Oct. 21. Credited to South and Wright, the piece quotes an unnamed source saying, "John and Patsy will claim that the real killer is a neighbor, Stephen Miles, who was once arrested and accused of a sex offense against a minor."
The Enquirer article also states Ramsey was planning on telling police his suspicions about Miles. In his suit, the photographer alleges the tabloid article "creates a deliberate, cumulative false impression in a reasonable reader that (the) plaintiff is a sex offender and a pedophile."
A second story, written by Wright and published Nov. 11, refers to a list of potential suspects allegedly given to police by the Ramseys' attorneys. "Included on that list are dozens of pedophiles and sex offenders living in Boulder. One of them, gay photographer Stephen Miles ..."
Miles was arrested in 1989 on suspicion of taking pornographic pictures of juvenile boys and providing them with drugs and alcohol. Some of those photographs allegedly featured simulated sex acts.
But the Boulder County District Attorney's Office dropped most of the charges when Miles agreed to plead guilty to a single charge of criminal attempt to contribute to the delinquency of a minor, according to district court records.
Miles is not on the Boulder Police Department's list of registered sex offenders.
But the photographer does have a history, stretching back to his teenage years, of getting into drug-related trouble.
Miles was arrested as a 19-year-old on suspicion of possession of marijuana. Ten years later, in 1977, he was placed on three years probation after pleading guilty to a charge of conspiracy to distribute narcotics. In return for that plea, three other drug charges were dismissed.
Since then, Miles has agreed to plea bargains in two other drug-related charges and pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor theft charge, according to court records.
Although he said he can't say whether police are looking into Miles as a suspect, the photographer's attorney said his client has not been interviewed by detectives.
Hill also said he's unsure if the libel suit will force Ramsey to publicly testify as to the events surrounding his daughter's murder.
If it turns out Ramsey isn't the source of the accusations printed in the Enquirer, Miles' suit leaves open the option to include other defendants.
"It wouldn't surprise me if a couple of others float to the surface as the investigation continues," Hill said.

Print this item

  Blood on tape
Posted by: jameson245 - 05-04-2017, 01:03 PM - Forum: Duck Tape - Replies (2)

I am reading a pile of files and want to let everyone know they did positively test the tape for blood and that came back positive.

So do you think there was blood coming from her nose or mouth?  I don't because that was not in the autopsy.

I think the tape was put on after the sexual assault, staging, and the blood was transferred from the assailant's fingers. 

I have not seen any lab reports on that - - maybe that is what they will be testing this year.

Print this item

  Notes on interview with pathologist
Posted by: jameson245 - 04-29-2017, 11:24 AM - Forum: Prior sexual abuse - No Replies

I am cleaning out some old files, reviewing them and filing some that had just been tossed to one side.  Came across an old interview with a pathologist and thought I would share what he said.  (Yes, he was a consultant to the case)

He was asked if JonBenét's hymen showed evidence of prior sexual contact with anyone (before the night she died).

The first thing he said was that there is a "great degree" of variables in hymens of little girls.  He said the shape described by Dr. Meyer's during the autopsy was absolutely normal and the fact that there was no evidence of tearing - - - the only evidence of any sexual contact is the very recent scrape to the vaginal wall.

That doctor would swear in court that there was NO evidence of anything happening to her before that horrible night.  No evidence of earlier assaults at all.  Nothing you would find if there was chronic or earlier abuse.  No injury to the anus or skin around the vagina or labia other than from that night, just before her death.

The BORG talk about the evidence of prior abuse like it is a proven fact.  But the doctor who did the autopsy wouldn't testify to such activity and others who WOULD be called into a courtroom will say there is NO evidence of anything happening before the night she died.

Print this item

  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

  Why Hunter did not go forward
Posted by: jameson245 - 04-17-2017, 12:38 PM - Forum: Grand Jury Indictments - Replies (2)

"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

  Jessica Lunsford
Posted by: jameson245 - 04-15-2017, 08:14 PM - Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds - Replies (2)

        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