Arrest made in the Jon Benet Ramsey case!

A

Apossum

Guest
:shock:

damn, there was a statement by the family lawyer, saying the family could rest easy now, so I guess that rules out Dad.


by now, I've forgotten the details. wasn't it that she was murdered, and there were no footsteps in the snow going to or from the house, implying that it was someone in the family?

http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=132300

Police in Boulder, Colorado say a suspect has been arrested in the ten year old murder case of JonBenet Ramsey.

It was early on December 26th, 1996, when JonBenet's mother, Patsy, called police to say she'd found a ransom note on the back stairs of their home, demanding more than $100,000 to spare the life of her daughter. Hours later, her husband, John Ramsey, found six-year-old JonBenet's body in the basement. She'd been beaten and strangled.

Police say the 41-year-old suspect was arrest in Bangkok, Thailand Wednesday morning and has confessed to certain elements of the crime that are unknown to the general public. He is said to be a second grade teacher.

Federal officials familiar with the case, who didn't want to be identified, say the man is being held in Bangkok on unrelated sex charges.

The suspect is expected to arrive back in the United States, possibly within the next two days, accompanied by an investigator from the Boulder DA's office.

The Boulder County DA's office has not confirmed the identity of the suspect, but is expected to have a press conference later on Wednesday.

JonBenet's parents were among the first people viewed as suspects, but they were never charged and always maintained they had nothing to do with their daughter's murder. In 2003, U.S. District Judge Julie Carnes in Atlanta concluded the evidence she reviewed suggested an intruder killed JonBenet. That opinion came with the judge's decision to dismiss a libel and slander lawsuit against the Ramseys by a freelance journalist, who the Ramseys had named as a suspect in their daughter's murder.

John and Patsy Ramsey said a stranger broke into their home and was the one who killed their daughter.

Patsy Ramsey died earlier this summer from cancer.
Click to expand...

of course, he confessed to "elements" of the crime. this could get interesting!
 
[quote name='Magehart']Hired hitman ftw?[/quote]

Thats one guess. It doesn't suprise me in the least that after the "mother" died, something like this or similar was bound to happen. I'm still on the concensus that Patsy is the one that did it
 
Amazing. I'm having a hard time believing it really had nothing to do with anyone in the family, but I'll try not to be so quick to judge next time.
 
this is one of those WTF moments.

now that this is over...someone in Aruba needs to cough up a body, or just say "Yea I did it , good luck in getting me out of here!"
 
[quote name='I AM WILLIAM H. MACY']Apparentally now it's some Asian guy.[/QUOTE]

naw prob some white guy who like young girl and boys
 
[quote name='Ugamer_X']Can we finally stop giving a shit?[/QUOTE]

Had you actually been continuing to give a shit for the past 10 years?
 
This is creepy as fuck:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060817/us_nm/crime_jonbenet_dc_21
"He killed the girl by accident," Immigration Police chief Lieutenant-General Suwat Tumroungsiskul told reporters after primary school teacher John Mark Karr, 41, was interrogated a day after his arrest in Bangkok.

"They fell in love with each other. She was very beautiful. So he kidnapped her and killed her by accident," Suwat said.
Click to expand...
 
I would like to remind everyone of this thread, in which I said the parents vouldn't possibly have done it and that an intruder was likely to blame. Of course, Brak, Graystone, Jeoff, and JimmieMac disagreed, despite a complete lack of evidence in favor of the theory that the parents did it, and a mountain showing it was an intruder.

So what I'm really getting at is the following:

pwned.
 
[quote name='evanft']I would like to remind everyone of this thread, in which I said the parents vouldn't possibly have done it and that an intruder was likely to blame. Of course, Brak, Graystone, Jeoff, and JimmieMac disagreed, despite a complete lack of evidence in favor of the theory that the parents did it, and a mountain showing it was an intruder.

So what I'm really getting at is the following:

pwned.[/quote]

Should we add a "Ms." before your name for the obligatory female "I told you so" mess...?
 
[quote name='HumanSnatcher']Should we add a "Ms." before your name for the obligatory female "I told you so" mess...?[/QUOTE]

Please.:bouncy:
 
I always find it amusing when someone takes a total insult as a compliment...

BTW: Always loved the black metal gif in your sig. Sadly enough given a few mins if I cared I could tell what band is what...
 
[quote name='evanft']I would like to remind everyone of this thread, in which I said the parents vouldn't possibly have done it and that an intruder was likely to blame. Of course, Brak, Graystone, Jeoff, and JimmieMac disagreed, despite a complete lack of evidence in favor of the theory that the parents did it, and a mountain showing it was an intruder.

So what I'm really getting at is the following:

pwned.[/QUOTE]

Confessions supercede evidence? Interesting...
 
This confession is weird. still waiting to see what comes of it, if anything--right now, it doesn't quite add up. people confess to things all the time when they haven't actually committed it.

[quote name='HumanSnatcher']Wheres the "One Night in Bangkok" by Murry Head jokes...?[/QUOTE]


over on fark...
 
I thought this was going to be one of those unsolved mysteries where no one would ever know... and I guess it will be since there are obviously people who think the confession is BS. I'm not sure but I do have to ask why would this guy confess after 10 years? Even if he did it and confessed out of guilt and everything I'm betting he will still walk. I mean any 1/2 competent attorney could instill reasonable doubt in the jury and obviously the confession isn't even good enough evidence for a lot of you...

EDIT: and now the guy's ex-wife is providing an alibi saying they were in Alabama during the time of the killing.
 
[quote name='Brak']Confessions supercede evidence? Interesting...[/QUOTE]

How does a a confession that completely gels with the evidence supercede said evidence?
 
[quote name='evanft']How does a a confession that completely gels with the evidence supercede said evidence?[/QUOTE]

VVVVV

[quote name='Javeryh'] and now the guy's ex-wife is providing an alibi saying they were in Alabama during the time of the killing. [/quote]

People confess to things when they haven't done them all the time. For all we know, he was just trying to get out of the Chinese prison (where he was being held for sex crimes....someone forgot to bribe the cop :roll: )
 
[quote name='evilmax17']Saw this coming from a mile away. Have they ever done DNA tests on the parents?[/quote]
Wouldn't have to, really. The sample they have should generally tell them if it's a blood relative. Unless she's adopted. *dun dun dun*
 
[quote name='botticus']Wouldn't have to, really. The sample they have should generally tell them if it's a blood relative. Unless she's adopted. *dun dun dun*[/QUOTE]

That's if they had taken and analyzed Jon Benet's DNA, which there would be very little reason to do.
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']That's if they had taken and analyzed Jon Benet's DNA, which there would be very little reason to do.[/quote]
Hmm... I suppose that's a good point. Pretty obvious cause of death so they probably didn't do a lot of bloodwork and whatnot.
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']That's if they had taken and analyzed Jon Benet's DNA, which there would be very little reason to do.[/QUOTE]

Little reason to do? It's a friggin' REQUIREMENT. You need victim DNA to determine if samples from other locations match or don't match the victim as well as any suspects.

This can be hugely important in determining where a dumped body was killed or if the killer left DNA at the scene, distinguishing it from that of the victim. In some cases, you can have assailant DNA mixed in with victim DNA, such as combined blood or other bodily fluids.

Any court case that used DNA evidence without a victim assay included would see that evidence thrown out.
 
[quote name='epobirs']Little reason to do? It's a friggin' REQUIREMENT. You need victim DNA to determine if samples from other locations match or don't match the victim as well as any suspects.

This can be hugely important in determining where a dumped body was killed or if the killer left DNA at the scene, distinguishing it from that of the victim. In some cases, you can have assailant DNA mixed in with victim DNA, such as combined blood or other bodily fluids.

Any court case that used DNA evidence without a victim assay included would see that evidence thrown out.[/QUOTE]

Good point. WTF, why didn't I think of that. No wonder I got a B- in Forensic Science, I wasn't paying fucking attention.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top