>It isn't his handwriting<P>Pardon me? I don't think you've been paying attention. You are categorically rejecting the findings of 6 experts who claim Patsy wrote the note, but you accept with NO question whatsoever the findings of 4 experts (2 hand picked by John) who have ruled him out. Please explain.<P>>- it isn't <BR>>his DNA,<P>give me a break . . . <P>>he had no motive<P>There is absolutely no basis for that statement, no more than the statement that he DID have a motive. There is at this point no way of telling whether he had a motive or not. We do know that fathers with a similar background and no prior history of sexual deviation have been known to molest their young daughters.<BR> <BR>>and there is NOTHING in his <BR>>history that indicates he would do <BR>>this. <P>That is certainly true. True also of many convicted murderers.<P>>I say look at others who were <BR>>in Boulder that night (had opportunity) <BR>>who have a history of violent <BR>>crimes, sexual dysfunction and interest in <BR>>bondage and true crimes.<P>Jameson, you want them to investigate any and every person with any sort of question mark in his history. The police have to proceed on some sort of logical basis, they cannot waste valuable civic resources on a series of wild goose chases. The investigation points very strongly to an insider, NOT an intruder. This is where they have, very logically, focused their attention. They have also looked very closely at a long list of other possibles and come up empty.<P>>They focused on the ramseys for 4 <BR>>1/2 years. Time to focus <BR>>on the killer. <P>They have focused on Patsy. YOU have focused on Patsy. John has been given pretty much a free ride. IMO, if they are going to redirect their efforts, they must start with a fresh, hard, look at John Ramsey.<P><P><BR>