Last edited by a moderator:
Indeed, but I wouldn't conclude that either.Or if gloves were worn
Not finding viable prints happens more often than not in most cases. Real life is not a CSI episode.No, I'm not saying that they didn't try to get prints, I'm saying that despite trying to get prints, they apparently didn't but so what since such can be the result for whatever reason.
I wouldn't conclude that that's the reason.
It would also depend on the texture of the flashlight.Indeed, but I wouldn't conclude that either.
i thought of that. But that would mean then anyone who ever handled it wore gloves.... At all times... A bit far fetched for me. Some surmise it may have belonged to a cop so okay it was HIS flashlight he always used and always used gloved. Never ungloved did he stow it away or put it on his person before or after work, etc. but then carelessly left it on a counter or whatever? I don't think so. Put the batteries in with gloves. Okayyyy...Or if gloves were worn
Has a pic of the flashlight ever been published? I have several that would be nearly impossible to get any prints from because of the textured surface. Again, this isn't a CSI episode where there is always a perfect print on what they are trying to get prints fromi thought of that. But that would mean then anyone who ever handled it wore gloves.... At all times... A bit far fetched for me. Some surmise it may have belonged to a cop so okay it was HIS flashlight he always used and always used gloved. Never ungloved did he stow it away or put it on his person before or after work, etc. but then carelessly left it on a counter or whatever? I don't think so. Put the batteries in with gloves. Okayyyy...
As I said I'm not stuck on it, but I certainly don't believe anyone can be certain of anything in this case because it was handled attrociously and at times probably intentionally so with someone or many someones at different times messing things up or not securing scenes, adding things in, taking things out, moving things, whatever.... And it worked didn't it... And continues to work.
When so much sn*w comes into something, one might as well go back to the basic facts imo and well, the basic facts are not an INTRUDER as some like to call the likely pero. Just that word isn't one generally used in any case... Someone intruded on their lives or in their home? Huh? Someone murdered a little girl. He got in. He murdered in their own home without a soul hearing a thing. He got out. He never left a trace. He isn't in any database. No, no, no, no and no.
No one saw him. No footprints. No entry point. Etc., etc., etc. etc.
I am sure I have something wrong but not going for perfect here but way too much to believe the intruder thing.
Oh and they got her out of her room, took her to the basement or she was up and the rest of the family wasn't and boy he just LUCKED OUT with ALL OF IT. Then sat down again to no one with a clue to write a note on Patsy's note pad. Knew John's bonus. Etc., etc., etc. etc.
I could go on. That is BEYOND BELIEF. And soooo very much more.
I don't have time to look right now but pretty sure I came across one the other day and looked like a typical long mag lite I think would be the right term and smooth is my guess. It wasn't a close up. Also batteries of course are smooth.Has a pic of the flashlight ever been published? I have several that would be nearly impossible to get any prints from because of the textured surface. Again, this isn't a CSI episode where there is always a perfect print on what they are trying to get prints from
Batteries in this case wouldn't necessarily tell anything about who used it last.I don't have time to look right now but pretty sure I came across one the other day and looked like a typical long mag lite I think would be the right term and smooth is my guess. It wasn't a close up. Also batteries of course are smooth.
No but if they were put in by the person who didn't do something or didn't use it last they'd have no reason to wipe them clean and there would likely be prints.Batteries in this case wouldn't necessarily tell anything about who used it last.
And I think the shape could be a factor that contributed to the difficulty and I'm sure there are others.I have several that would be nearly impossible to get any prints from because of the textured surface.
That's a very interesting point, thanks for sharing it.Batteries in this case wouldn't necessarily tell anything about who used it last.
Yes. A ransom note would be a amount you hear of. $100,000, $75,000. $118,000. Dumb. They didn't do a very good job with the note leading the police strongly in the direction of someone where he worked.I too think it was definitely inner circle for those reasons and others and I lean towards the parent(s) hard.
if you think it was John do you both then think Patsy wrote the note for him? It was her handwriting that couldn't be excluded, etc. I believe the cover up was by both of them most likely. And they stayed firm to it through all the years that followed.
Citing the bonus was really dumb but done hastily wanting I suppose to make it look like someone targeted the daughter of this "rich" family with a "pretty little girl" who did pageants. Who knows, maybe they hoped it would point to someone at the firm that new them and their kids... I think more likely though it was a very ill thought out choice they couldn't go back on...
More likely since she was in the home and they coudln't get her out easily, they wanted it to appear someone was that intimate with the family, knew what they were doing, stalked or watched or was close and knew how to get in, used Patsy's desk and notepad and knew the bonus amount. It HAD to be someone that came in easily, or Jon Benet knew, etc. THAT is what I think they wanted LE to think, that someone entered their home. They may have had someone in mind they hoped it would lead towards, a coworker, a boss, the housekeeper, etc. or ALL such.Yes. A ransom note would be a amount you hear of. $100,000, $75,000. $118,000. Dumb. They didn't do a very good job with the note leading the police strongly in the direction of someone where he worked.
Yep. No footprints, no dust disturbed, etc., etc., etc.But then the geniuses removed the outdoor screen, Etc. To make it look like an intruder. But the sill had no dust disturbance.
No, I don't think so. We knew of him and he's not new. This sounded like something new just yesterday or thereabouts. Like I said, I didn't go into the videos but first it was Court TV and then I saw another YTer had it who I didn't know of (the YTer) when I was refreshing to find Long Island stuff, etc.Pedophile who 'confessed to JonBenét murder' had creepy Pinterest devoted to her
THE disturbing Pinterest page of a depraved pedophile who claims to be JonBenét Ramsey’s killer featured dozens of photos of the slain beauty queen and 300 images of other young children. Gar…www.thesun.co.uk