Anonymous wrote:
Covering up the murder, wouldn't necessarily show the heart of a psychopath, but rather the same kind of personality that value how things look above all else. A person would bleach her kid's hair and parade her though a myriad of beauty pageants. A person who lost one child, but wasn't going to lose another, so writes a ridiculous 2-3 page ransom not from a note pad in her home. A person who would hire a publicist for the funeral of her slain daughter.
Murdering out of passion or lying about a murder doesn't make you a serial killer.
Anonymous wrote:The information about the new DNA was given by the prosecutor when they stated that they had cleared the Ramseys. I can't remember exactly when this was, but I believe Patsy was already deceased.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think you people need to read up on the facts of the case. First of all, this was a brutal sexual assault, very unlikely to be perpetrated by the parents as a cover-up. Also the parents were cleared because of more sophisticated DNA testing. The unknown DNA found in her underwear was originally thought to be possible contamination. However, when more sophisticated DNA was developed, this same DNA was found on her pajamas at the hip area on both sides, where it would seem to be someone pulling down her pajama bottoms. This was considered as proof that an intruder had assaulted her.
So she ate pineapple around 10pm, then went to bed. At some point a stranger smashed in her skull, then waited a couple of hours, took her to the basement and strangled her with supplies gathered from inside the house. Sexually assaulted her. Went back upstairs and wrote a ransom note (with rough draft). Then left the ransom note at the bottom of the stairs for Patsy to find at 5:00am......and disappeared into the night.
I just can not...begin to believe that.
did they match the DNA against the brother?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think you people need to read up on the facts of the case. First of all, this was a brutal sexual assault, very unlikely to be perpetrated by the parents as a cover-up. Also the parents were cleared because of more sophisticated DNA testing. The unknown DNA found in her underwear was originally thought to be possible contamination. However, when more sophisticated DNA was developed, this same DNA was found on her pajamas at the hip area on both sides, where it would seem to be someone pulling down her pajama bottoms. This was considered as proof that an intruder had assaulted her.
wow. I would think unfortunately as a child beauty star, there would be pedofiles in that circle. sounds sadly likely. could be a photographer, makeup artist, another girls dad from a pageant. .
Anonymous wrote:I think you people need to read up on the facts of the case. First of all, this was a brutal sexual assault, very unlikely to be perpetrated by the parents as a cover-up. Also the parents were cleared because of more sophisticated DNA testing. The unknown DNA found in her underwear was originally thought to be possible contamination. However, when more sophisticated DNA was developed, this same DNA was found on her pajamas at the hip area on both sides, where it would seem to be someone pulling down her pajama bottoms. This was considered as proof that an intruder had assaulted her.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think you people need to read up on the facts of the case. First of all, this was a brutal sexual assault, very unlikely to be perpetrated by the parents as a cover-up. Also the parents were cleared because of more sophisticated DNA testing. The unknown DNA found in her underwear was originally thought to be possible contamination. However, when more sophisticated DNA was developed, this same DNA was found on her pajamas at the hip area on both sides, where it would seem to be someone pulling down her pajama bottoms. This was considered as proof that an intruder had assaulted her.
So she ate pineapple around 10pm, then went to bed. At some point a stranger smashed in her skull, then waited a couple of hours, took her to the basement and strangled her with supplies gathered from inside the house. Sexually assaulted her. Went back upstairs and wrote a ransom note (with rough draft). Then left the ransom note at the bottom of the stairs for Patsy to find at 5:00am......and disappeared into the night.
I just can not...begin to believe that.
Anonymous wrote:I think you people need to read up on the facts of the case. First of all, this was a brutal sexual assault, very unlikely to be perpetrated by the parents as a cover-up. Also the parents were cleared because of more sophisticated DNA testing. The unknown DNA found in her underwear was originally thought to be possible contamination. However, when more sophisticated DNA was developed, this same DNA was found on her pajamas at the hip area on both sides, where it would seem to be someone pulling down her pajama bottoms. This was considered as proof that an intruder had assaulted her.
Anonymous wrote:I think you people need to read up on the facts of the case. First of all, this was a brutal sexual assault, very unlikely to be perpetrated by the parents as a cover-up. Also the parents were cleared because of more sophisticated DNA testing. The unknown DNA found in her underwear was originally thought to be possible contamination. However, when more sophisticated DNA was developed, this same DNA was found on her pajamas at the hip area on both sides, where it would seem to be someone pulling down her pajama bottoms. This was considered as proof that an intruder had assaulted her.
Anonymous wrote:Accidental cover up is the least likely theory to me. If one of your children hit your other on the head or caused them to hit their head, and they were injured, you wouldn't even stop to find out why or how it happened, you would call 911 or drive to straight to the emergency room while getting the story. These were parents who had never denied their children medical care or anything like that.
No one's reaction to being surprised by an injury would be to a) assume it would cause their other YOUNG child to be charged with anything or need protection and then b) KILL their injured child by strangling them with a garrote and then sexually assault the child.
I think there is a possibility (I give about 50%) a Ramsey did it, but if they did, they did something on purpose intending to commit a crime. I doubt this was the crime of a 9 or 10 year old child, it almost certainly would have been an adult. Additionally, if they parents had abused her either before or that night openly (while Burke was awake) then it seems pretty likely a child of that age would have disclosed that eventually.
I think there an equal possibility it was an intruder because none of the Ramseys seem to have any indication of the psychopathy required to do this to a small child. You have to take that into account. It's a very brutal crime with a sexual element (whether "staged" or not). That's statistically one of the rarest kinds of homicide (vs for example shooting someone in a drug deal). It just seems so improbable that someone would commit this crime because their child got injured...or wet the bed...or anything. It would have to be a depraved heart psychopath who meant to do it and quite frankly the Ramseys just don't fit. But then again no other serial criminal has emerged so that's weird too.