DNA not a match in JonBenet Ramsey murder case... whoops

[rainstorm]

he probably cant go into details, because if he did his confession would fall apart

[rainstorm]

i would think they could find out if its a false confession rather quickly. just ask him which entrance did he use to get in the house. once he answers, just say, we found no footprints there, but we did find muddy footprints inside the window next to the garage. if he says, "oh, yea, now i remember, thats where i got in", its a false confession

[GalvestonDuck]

He knows as much as we know, if not more. The articles have said that he had books on the JBR case as well as the Polly Klaas case. It's easy for him to answer the right questions in regards to those details that were already publicized.

The big answer will come if the DNA matches and/or if the footprint and handprint near her body match his.

[sunny]

The big answer will come if the DNA matches and/or if the footprint and handprint near her body match his.

I agree Duckie. Didn't they say he knew things that only the killer could have known? I thought they said that yesterday.

[bfez1]

He knows as much as we know, if not more. The articles have said that he had books on the JBR case as well as the Polly Klaas case. It's easy for him to answer the right questions in regards to those details that were already publicized.

The big answer will come if the DNA matches and/or if the footprint and handprint near her body match his.

ITA. duck
DNA is the puzzle solver

[rainstorm]

He knows as much as we know, if not more. The articles have said that he had books on the JBR case as well as the Polly Klaas case. It's easy for him to answer the right questions in regards to those details that were already publicized.

The big answer will come if the DNA matches and/or if the footprint and handprint near her body match his.

not necessarily. in the article i quoted from th rocky mountain news investigators said he told them he picked her up from school the day he killed her. not possible, as school was out for christmas. he also stated he drugged her, but the autopsy indicated no evidence of drugs.

obviously, if the dna matches, its a lock

[Josephine96]

I decided to finally chime in here..

I really hope this "alleged creep" is Jon benet's killer so that this case is resolved. But.. I have issues. He keeps saying "no comment" on certain questions yet he says "he drugged her, had sex with her" whatever.

Also.. The fact that this guy keeps talking out loud about whats going on. No nit wit in their right mind would brag about raping and then killing a 6 yr old. He also says he was "with Jon benet" um.. yeah. If ya killed her of course you were with her.

BTW.. My opinion about John or Patsy. I think they are innocent. I will play the "no comment" card on that because I can't entirely elaborate because I would just not make any sense.

It makes sense because Karr is apparently a pedophile, was once arrested on pornography charges, but something about the way he's talking is very odd.

But for now.. I'm just gonna believe, "Jon benet, Patsy, you both can rest in peace, justice has hopefully been served".

[Janice]

Well, I think anyway you look at it, he is a nut. He is probably a habitual liar too. I would not believe anything he says. He probably lied to the professor too. He does not seem a bit worried on tv. Seems to love the cameras. He may have lied to everyone all along. Like said above, the DNA will tell the truth.

[GalvestonDuck]

He knows as much as we know, if not more. The articles have said that he had books on the JBR case as well as the Polly Klaas case. It's easy for him to answer the right questions in regards to those details that were already publicized.

The big answer will come if the DNA matches and/or if the footprint and handprint near her body match his.

not necessarily. in the article i quoted from th rocky mountain news investigators said he told them he picked her up from school the day he killed her. not possible, as school was out for christmas. he also stated he drugged her, but the autopsy indicated no evidence of drugs.

obviously, if the dna matches, its a lock

That's right -- "investigators said he told them" -- Thai investigators. We have to remember that there could be a language barrier. Furthermore, that makes it hearsay.

As I said before, we don't know what drugs the tox screen tested for. I can assure you, not all drugs are covered in toxicology tests and there is a chance that whatever he used may not have been in the standard urine screen.

obviously, if the dna matches, its a lock

And the footprint and the handprint.

Remember, I've said myself that there's a possibility that he didn't act alone. DNA could match a sexual assailant, regardless of where the assault took place, whereas footprints or handprints would put someone at the actual scene where her body was found.

[Lindaloo]

Well either way he is going to prison. We have discussed this at the office and we all believe that he could possibly be in this for the money and notoriety. He has been studying up on all this since it happened. He possibly wants recognition and publicity for a book he is going to write. I know that is kinda far fetched right now, but think about it.

[Janice]

Well, you have to remember, he was caught and did not surrender. That makes a big difference. If he wanted money for a book or movie, wouldn't he have surrendered first?

I need a drink

[Josephine96]

My question is this. If he REALLY DID NOT do it.., then what kinda legal trouble does he really get into?

Someone who knows, please explain

[rainstorm]

He knows as much as we know, if not more. The articles have said that he had books on the JBR case as well as the Polly Klaas case. It's easy for him to answer the right questions in regards to those details that were already publicized.

The big answer will come if the DNA matches and/or if the footprint and handprint near her body match his.

not necessarily. in the article i quoted from th rocky mountain news investigators said he told them he picked her up from school the day he killed her. not possible, as school was out for christmas. he also stated he drugged her, but the autopsy indicated no evidence of drugs.

obviously, if the dna matches, its a lock

That's right -- "investigators said he told them" -- Thai investigators. We have to remember that there could be a language barrier. Furthermore, that makes it hearsay.

As I said before, we don't know what drugs the tox screen tested for. I can assure you, not all drugs are covered in toxicology tests and there is a chance that whatever he used may not have been in the standard urine screen.

obviously, if the dna matches, its a lock

And the footprint and the handprint.

Remember, I've said myself that there's a possibility that he didn't act alone. DNA could match a sexual assailant, regardless of where the assault took place, whereas footprints or handprints would put someone at the actual scene where her body was found.

but again, there was a fresh snow cover and yet not one sign of a footprint leaving or entering any entrance point to the house. if more than 1 person were involved, that makes no footprints even more bizarre. one other question. was john ramseys dna ever sampled? there is one explanation why footprints were never found outside the house. the person who killed her was in the house all the time, and didnt leave after the crime

[GalvestonDuck]

but again, there was a fresh snow cover and yet not one sign of a footprint leaving or entering any entrance point to the house. if more than 1 person were involved, that makes no footprints even more bizarre. one other question. was john ramseys dna ever sampled?

I'm sure it was tested already and I can't imagine why it wouldn't have been, given all the theories that the parents did it.

I agree with you about the footprints in the snow. How fresh was it? Did it possibly fall after the assailants left and therefore there were no footprints outside?

Remember, I was one of the original ones who thought one, if not both, of the parents was involved and the lack of footprints outside the house was part of the reason why. Those clues would lead one to believe that no one came in from the outside. However, there was a footprint and handprint near her body that did not match the Ramseys or her brother as well as DNA that apparently didn't match anyone in the family.

[Janice]

Maybe he went out the front door if the sidewalk, etc. was shoveled.....

[rainstorm]

thats pretty bold to go out the front door. i seem to have read that neither of the ramseys dna was sampled. they blocked that through thier lawyers. i cant remember for certain though. of course, unless semen was found in her undergarments, the family could say dna got there and under her nails by numerous innocent scenarios.

[GalvestonDuck]

To answer the question about John Ramsey's DNA, yes it was ruled out as the suspect DNA:

"Right now, the DNA profile that's in hand doesn't match anyone associated with the investigation, so that would include the parents," says LaBerge, the Denver police scientist who believes this is the last and best hope to crack the case. "If the DNA never matches someone, the case, depending on the rest of the investigation, may never be solved.”

Now, the same DNA that saved the Ramseys from indictment is finally being used to check out the dozens and dozens of suspects who were ignored for years.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/ ... 1569.shtml

Now I have to wonder...were these two involved together (Helgoth and Karr)? Did Karr kill Helgoth and that's why it's all such a long story to tell? I forgot all about this guy until I looked up to see about the father's DNA.

One of those suspects came to light in a most dramatic way. It was early in 1997, when Alex Hunter, then Boulder district attorney, made a startling announcement: "I want to say something to the person or persons that took this baby from us. The list of suspects narrows. Soon, there will be no one on the list but you."

Those words were written by the FBI as part of a strategy to put the killer and any accomplices under pressure. That strategy may have worked. But just two days later, the Boulder Sheriff's Department discovered a man by the name of Michael Helgoth, dead in his home, an apparent suicide.

Kenady didn't think anything of it, until he read in newspapers about the ransom note found at the Ramsey home that demanded a curious $118,000. It was close to the amount Helgoth had said he and his unknown partner would make -– and it was a ransom that was never paid to anyone.

"Then Christmas goes -- comes. And then he's really depressed. And there's no money. And then he said that he wanted to crack a human skull," says Kenady. "And then, she received a crack in her skull. I felt obligated to go to the police department and tell them what I knew."

"His friends say that he owns several stun guns, that he was a gun nut," adds Gray. "And supposedly through the sources that we talked to, that he used to break into people's houses just for the thrill of doing it."

The stun gun is important because Gray and San Augustin believe, from examining autopsy photos, that JonBenet was incapacitated with one at some point during her attack.

"In that time frame, 1995-95 time frame, the only stun gun that had a laser sight on it was Air Taser," says Gray, who adds that he believes this was the same type of stun gun used on JonBenet.

But what was even more disturbing were videotapes of Helgoth and one of his girlfriend's children. "The ex-girlfriend and he had a major argument over supposedly her coming home and finding the daughter in the bedroom, and he was in bed under covers and she was on the covers," says Gray. "They had a big fight and there were temporary restraining orders issued."

Most surprising of all, however, was the nature of Helgoth's suicide. Investigators initially said he died from a bullet to his head. But in fact, Gray says, the fatal shot was nowhere near his head.

"The gun was found on Michael's right and he's right-handed," says Gray. "The bullet hole is on Michael's left and it goes across the body from left to right."

"It became really odd to us that he would then take the gun and bring it around and then try and shoot himself," adds San Augustin. "It doesn't make sense why you would have somebody commit suicide in that manner."

The investigators were left with only one conclusion. Someone killed Helgoth. Why?

[rainstorm]

again, we are left with does the dna match karr. and the dna may not even be significant, depending on what kind of sample it came from

[GalvestonDuck]

My question is this. If he REALLY DID NOT do it.., then what kinda legal trouble does he really get into?

Someone who knows, please explain

My guess: Three possible charges
- filing a false police report (After all, a confession is a police report also, right? I don't believe it has to be a false complaint to be considered a false report.
- obstruction of justice (He's taking away from the true investigation of the crime)
- perjury (If it goes to trial and he didn't do it, he would be lying under oath if he tried to say he did or offered details of the crime that weren't true)

[GalvestonDuck]

again, we are left with does the dna match karr. and the dna may not even be significant, depending on what kind of sample it came from

I guess we just have to wait and see.