+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 102
  1. #81
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    4,852
    Thanks
    4,421
    Thanked
    4,276
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week

    Default The Case of JonBenèt Ramsey

    Quote Originally Posted by Full House View Post
    Now now, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.
    Pretty disgusting if they didn't address the other DNA evidence and the fact that the same male's DNA was found on her panties and long john's plus another person's/people's DNA found under her fingernails, none of which matches the Ramseys' but yet they'll blame a 9 year old boy...

  2. #82
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,057
    Thanks
    1,161
    Thanked
    2,879
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by HollyGolightly81 View Post
    Pretty disgusting if they didn't address the other DNA evidence and the fact that the same male's DNA was found on her panties and long john's plus another person's/people's DNA found under her fingernails, none of which matches the Ramseys' but yet they'll blame a 9 year old boy...
    I've just read the Ramsey's are sueing due to the lies and misrepresentations in the series. Sounds pretty dodgy.

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    10,431
    Thanks
    3,281
    Thanked
    6,342
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    I can see that those in this thread who are criticising the program didn't actually watch it.

    Whether it was biased or not, it was very convincing. Whilst I never knew the intricate details of this case prior to watching this special, I had never thought the family would be involved. Now, I am finding it near impossible to believe that the Ramseys had no knowledge or involvement of what happened to their daughter.

    That so-called ransom letter was one of the dodgiest things I have ever seen. It would have taken an 'intruder' over 20 mins to hand write that letter, plus there was a draft or two written before that (there were imprints on the writing pad). All written on the Ramsey's pad of paper with their sharpie pen.

    I'm interested in reading up on the other side of the argument (that it was an outsider/intruder) when I have some spare time.

  4. #84
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,057
    Thanks
    1,161
    Thanked
    2,879
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    You're right, I didn't watch it (and never will), and maybe it was an 'inside' job...however, I think that it's pretty awful that a tv show can point fingers at someone who was proven innocent when they have to go out and live their life. It's awful. If Burke is an innocent man then his life has been destroyed. I couldn't imagine having my sibling be murdered, and living my whole life being accussed of their murder.

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,658
    Thanks
    430
    Thanked
    876
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Full House View Post
    You're right, I didn't watch it (and never will), and maybe it was an 'inside' job...however, I think that it's pretty awful that a tv show can point fingers at someone who was proven innocent when they have to go out and live their life. It's awful. If Burke is an innocent man then his life has been destroyed. I couldn't imagine having my sibling be murdered, and living my whole life being accussed of their murder.
    These accusations aren't new and have been floating around since the beginning. The Ramsays have also sued anyone who has spoken out against them so I'm sure that CBS will be expecting to be sued.

    I think the family knows who did it - whether it was the son or not, they covered up for someone and I think that's pretty clear. What sort of parent (s)calls in a private jet the day his daughter is found murdered in the family home? Or refuse to give police interviews for 4 months? Why was the torch wiped clean of all fingerprints? Why was crucial evidence not DNA tested? It's all very dodgy and I do think the family didn't want it solved.

    It's a very sad case and I agree that this little girl has had no justice.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Pearlygirl For This Useful Post:

    Tinkers  (22-09-2016)

  7. #86
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    447
    Thanks
    368
    Thanked
    228
    Reviews
    0
    It makes me so sad that that beautiful girl will never have justice. Whenever her photo comes up my heart just falls apart for her

  8. #87
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    6,242
    Thanks
    5,704
    Thanked
    4,634
    Reviews
    20
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts

  9. #88
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    4,852
    Thanks
    4,421
    Thanked
    4,276
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Mod-Degrassi View Post
    I can see that those in this thread who are criticising the program didn't actually watch it.

    Whether it was biased or not, it was very convincing. Whilst I never knew the intricate details of this case prior to watching this special, I had never thought the family would be involved. Now, I am finding it near impossible to believe that the Ramseys had no knowledge or involvement of what happened to their daughter.

    That so-called ransom letter was one of the dodgiest things I have ever seen. It would have taken an 'intruder' over 20 mins to hand write that letter, plus there was a draft or two written before that (there were imprints on the writing pad). All written on the Ramsey's pad of paper with their sharpie pen.

    I'm interested in reading up on the other side of the argument (that it was an outsider/intruder) when I have some spare time.
    No I didn't watch it (and I don't want to) but nobody has answered my question as to how they explain ALL of the DNA evidence that cleared the family. Since people on here are only talking about her underwear is it safe to assume they completely gloss over the fact that the same male's DNA found on her underwear was also found elsewhere on her? That's a pretty big deal to ignore and completely throws the theory that it was DNA from the manufacturing process out the window. There was also unknown female DNA found under her fingernails (in reference to the ransom note being written by a female). The intruder also could have wiped down the flashlight. The show might have been convincing but it sounds to me like the creators went into it with the decision they were going to blame Burke so only presented a story to prove that point. Not discussing the various other DNA findings (if they did not) is pretty disgusting and irresponsible in my opinion.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to HollyGolightly81 For This Useful Post:

    Full House  (22-09-2016)

  11. #89
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    4,852
    Thanks
    4,421
    Thanked
    4,276
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Pearlygirl View Post
    These accusations aren't new and have been floating around since the beginning. The Ramsays have also sued anyone who has spoken out against them so I'm sure that CBS will be expecting to be sued.

    I think the family knows who did it - whether it was the son or not, they covered up for someone and I think that's pretty clear. What sort of parent (s)calls in a private jet the day his daughter is found murdered in the family home? Or refuse to give police interviews for 4 months? Why was the torch wiped clean of all fingerprints? Why was crucial evidence not DNA tested? It's all very dodgy and I do think the family didn't want it solved.

    It's a very sad case and I agree that this little girl has had no justice.
    CBS is already being sued. So just because the media has always thought Burke they are justified in trying to pin it on him again 20 years later after DNA evidence (which I've listed in two other posts) cleared him?

    Could the intruders not have wiped the torch clean? And how is it the family's fault that DNA wasn't tested? The cops are the ones that continued to let family and friends walk through out the house after she was reported missing and found dead. The cops are the ones that told the father to check the basement rather than checking themselves. And the cops are the ones that told the media the family were suspects a few days later rather than waiting for evidence.

  12. #90
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    6,242
    Thanks
    5,704
    Thanked
    4,634
    Reviews
    20
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by HollyGolightly81 View Post
    No I didn't watch it (and I don't want to) but nobody has answered my question as to how they explain ALL of the DNA evidence that cleared the family. Since people on here are only talking about her underwear is it safe to assume they completely gloss over the fact that the same male's DNA found on her underwear was also found elsewhere on her? That's a pretty big deal to ignore and completely throws the theory that it was DNA from the manufacturing process out the window. There was also unknown female DNA found under her fingernails (in reference to the ransom note being written by a female). The intruder also could have wiped down the flashlight. The show might have been convincing but it sounds to me like the creators went into it with the decision they were going to blame Burke so only presented a story to prove that point. Not discussing the various other DNA findings (if they did not) is pretty disgusting and irresponsible in my opinion.
    I think they had said the dna found on her pants could be transfer dna. I was starting to nod off then, so I'm not sure.

    While it's kind of hard not to point the finger at someone in the home because of so many factors, it did seem like they were pretty set on that theory and they had set out to prove it.

    From what I've read elsewhere:
    Regarding the dna, they were both only very minor amounts and I'm pretty sure they had varying markers, some of which were low and not really conclusive.
    With the fingernails, apparently the nail clippers used during the autopsy were not sterile and had possibly been used on other deceased people without being cleaned.


 

Similar Threads

  1. Huggies travel wipes case
    By lisaandshaun in forum General area
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 24-07-2016, 18:23
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 29-12-2015, 09:40

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
FEATURED SUPPORTER
TribalanceTriBalance is a physio, yoga & pilates studio in Brisbane's inner north, offering specialised women's health ...
REVIEWS
"Pigeon teats rule!"
by Alex
Pigeon PP Wide Neck reviews ›
"Wonderful natural Aussie made product!"
by Mrstwr
Baby U Goat Milk Moisturiser reviews ›
"Replaced good quality with cheap tight nappies"
by Kris
Coles Comfy Bots Nappies reviews ›