Go back to previous page
Forum URL: http://www.webbsleuths.com/cgi-bin/dcf/dcboard.cgi
Forum Name: more and more JBR
Topic ID: 2116
#0, what should Keenan do?
Posted by Saluda on Jan-30-04 at 10:34 PM
What previously examined evidence, leads, or unexplored evidence or leads should DA Keenan and her team be pursuing?

I think clearing up any problematic DNA should be # 1. I also think surveying the community near where JonBenet was killed and everyone known to be in the neighborhood at that time should also be # 1, even though this would yield only way old accounts. Evidently, BPD did not go door-to-door to do good police-work after JonBenet was killed. But they should try, even these many years after the BPD failed for JonBenet.

What else shoule DA Keenan be doing to find the killer of JonBenet?


#1, Testing the cigarette butts
Posted by Maikai on Jan-30-04 at 10:55 PM
In response to message #0
that were scooped up with the leaves, to see if any of the DNA matches that found on JBR.

Hopefully, they've gone over all the tips that were turned in earlyon...the ones that the BPD didn't deem worthy of pursuing. Not unlike the Bundy case, the right tip may be sitting somewhere in a box.

Send the DNA to the lab in Florida to see if they can determine the race of the perp (I bet they've done that).

Compare DNA with that found at other violent crime scenes in the area.

Review the registration of all the air tasers.

Go back through the evidence collected to see if there is more forensic evidence that was missed.

File an arrest warrant for "John Doe" based on the DNA. That way, if there is a match somewhere, the local law enforcement agency can arrest the perp.

There was an article on Findlaw today about Mary Keenan, and the rape victims at CU parties. She testified that at least one of the coaches said they couldn't afford to lose the team player that did the rape, because it would hurt the team. This lady is not going to let anyone intimidate her-----and I think she is driven to do the right thing in the Ramsey case.


#2, RE: what should Keenan do?
Posted by Shelby on Jan-30-04 at 10:57 PM
In response to message #0
Obtain a list of contractors the Ramseys used in their home renovations. There were TWENTY-FIVE keys to their home that were out at the time of the murder. Many of those were to the contractors. Get a list of all the work done during 1996, and all the subcontractors hired by the contractors. Carpenters, plumbers, carpet inststallers, carpet cleaners, electricians, landscapers, etc.
Hurry, Mary Keenan!

#3, Key to the case.
Posted by DonBradley on Jan-30-04 at 11:04 PM
In response to message #2
LAST EDITED ON Jan-30-04 AT 11:16 PM (EST)
 
It would be routine to track down all those keys and all the employees, but its a bit late now and most of those employees are transients or nearly so.

I would question the 'return on investment' of the manpower and time allocated to tracking down keys when there is such evidence of entry and exit via the window.

On-edit: In comparison, I would say the neighborhood canvass would be likely to be ore of a higher grade: it could turn up someone in the area. Such crimes are actually likely to be committed by people who are close by and familiar with the area, able to view the house without arousing suspicion, etc.

DA-Keenan undoubtedly knows the value of dna evidence but also realizes that without a suspect it is not worth much. Thats why they are probably going all through the ignored leads first. There is no use replowing an already well-plowed field. The "obvious suspects" such as LHP, Fleet White, The Groundskeeper, Jeff Merrick, McSanta are not likely to show up any differently the second time around. Someone who was overlooked the first time is more likely.



#4, RE: Key to the case.
Posted by Shelby on Jan-30-04 at 11:12 PM
In response to message #3
Okay, maybe they didn't use a key. But they had been working on the property, maybe inside the house, saw the layout, saw the "rich family" and the beautiful little daughter. Maybe they didn't like the way the "fat cat" treated them.

#5, RE: Key to the case.
Posted by DonBradley on Jan-30-04 at 11:19 PM
In response to message #4
Yes, I guess thats true. Especially since the contractor or the foreman might have the key and the laborers would never have had it.

Now it is true that the Ramseys would have been unlikely to have ever given the laborers cause to be offended, but I doubt that any such offense that was taken had to have been justified. Sometimes a contractor claims he hasn't been paid by the owner when in fact he has. And sometimes its just a demented soul who sees insults directed at him wherever he goes.


#6, RE: Key to the case.
Posted by one_eyed Jack on Jan-31-04 at 07:13 AM
In response to message #5
Ask the public for help.

#7, Caterers had the key
Posted by Maikai on Jan-31-04 at 08:27 AM
In response to message #6
too. Even if someone had the key, they wouldn't know if the door was armed with the alarm. From all appearances, the perp didn't have a key, and didn't know if the alarm was on, since he picked a broken window for access---a clue that at least that window wasn't armed---even dumb criminals can figure that out. Vulnerable basement windows are the first place targeted by burglars---seems to be the case here, too.

#8, Perhaps thats the key!
Posted by DonBradley on Jan-31-04 at 09:19 AM
In response to message #7
With burglar alarm decals on ground level doors and windows, he chose a basement window that was unalarmed. I agree that burglars would know to make that choice, but would a non-career criminal be that astute?
Perhaps we have a clue here that narrows the field a bit?
Perhaps not?

Ask the public for help? She is liable to have several hand-knitted nooses sent to her.


#9, RE: Perhaps thats the key!
Posted by one_eyed Jack on Jan-31-04 at 03:25 PM
In response to message #8
>Ask the public for help? She is liable to have several
>hand-knitted nooses sent to her.

I hadn't thought about that. Of course, LE asks the public for help often, and they get the help they were looking for. Perhaps, they have no questions? Mary Keenan consulted with John Douglas who would have given her ideas on proactive techniques to use if he thought it would do any good.

My guess is the name has been in the file since the early stages, though. Probably from a tipster or someone interviewed. I do wish Boulder would hire more people, if nothing else, to run down all the tips that came in that were buried in a file.


#10, RE: Snitches
Posted by Margoo on Jan-31-04 at 04:43 PM
In response to message #9
What Should Mary Keenan Do?

Check for prison snitches; anyone who might have shared a cell with someone who told some stories about killing a little girl, Christmas night.

(Memories of Shawshank Redemption, though. I hope there is no one NEEDING to conceal Ramsey information.)


#11, RE: Perhaps thats the key!
Posted by one_eyed Jack on Jan-31-04 at 05:48 PM
In response to message #8
>With burglar alarm decals on ground level doors and windows,
>he chose a basement window that was unalarmed. I agree that
>burglars would know to make that choice, but would a
>non-career criminal be that astute?
>Perhaps we have a clue here that narrows the field a bit?
>Perhaps not?


Is it really true that many homeowners invest in home alarms and don't bother to alarm the basement windows? If so, I don't believe that would be common knowledge.


#12, RE: Package deals
Posted by Evening2 on Jan-31-04 at 05:56 PM
In response to message #11
Most alarm companies offer a "package deal",,,IOW, "we will arm two doors and three windows, one key pad, one alarm box, etc. for $99.95 and then you pay the monthly service fee. If you want to add other doors, they are about $150 per door and something else like $100 per additional window. So, a large home with lots of doors and dozens of windows would cost a fortune. Also, newer homes that are already pre-wired cost much less to arm than an older home where the installation process has to start from scratch. The Ramseys obviously could have afforded it no matter what the cost, but probably only chose to arm conspicuous access points since they felt Boulder was reasonably safe.

#13, RE: Package deals
Posted by one_eyed Jack on Jan-31-04 at 06:10 PM
In response to message #12
>Most alarm companies offer a "package deal",,,IOW, "we will
>arm two doors and three windows, one key pad, one alarm box,
>etc. for $99.95 and then you pay the monthly service fee.
>If you want to add other doors, they are about $150 per door
>and something else like $100 per additional window. So, a
>large home with lots of doors and dozens of windows would
>cost a fortune. Also, newer homes that are already
>pre-wired cost much less to arm than an older home where the
>installation process has to start from scratch. The Ramseys
>obviously could have afforded it no matter what the cost,
>but probably only chose to arm conspicuous access points
>since they felt Boulder was reasonably safe.

You're just a wealth of knowledge, today. I think the Ramseys just left the existing alarm system how they found it. So, even someone who had little to no previous criminal behavior could have easily speculated that some of the windows would not be alarmed.

What's the use of an alarm system that can be gotten around so easily?


#14, RE: Package deals
Posted by Evening2 on Jan-31-04 at 06:19 PM
In response to message #13
I think you're right, OEJ, about the existing alarm system. I think I remember reading that their system was an older one and they had some problems with the alarm going off unnecessarily.

About my being a wealth of knowledge, today, I'm just taking some free time before going out to buy a carpet cleaner,,,a necessity for Yorkie owners, LOL.

The only reason I know about the alarm companies is from my personal experience when we recently bought our new home. The reps came to our home by the dozens. I kept offering them "my deal" and didn't "buy" until I found one who would accept it. My deal was, arm all doors and all windows "free" and I will prepay the service charge for three years. Finally found one that did it. They make their money on the monthly service charges, not on the equipment.


#15, RE: Package deals
Posted by one_eyed Jack on Jan-31-04 at 06:30 PM
In response to message #14
>About my being a wealth of knowledge, today, I'm just taking
>some free time before going out to buy a carpet cleaner,,,a
>necessity for Yorkie owners, LOL.

We're on the same wavelength, today. I have to carpet clean today, too. My problem is an elderly cat, though.

>The only reason I know about the alarm companies is from my
>personal experience when we recently bought our new home.
>The reps came to our home by the dozens. I kept offering
>them "my deal" and didn't "buy" until I found one who would
>accept it. My deal was, arm all doors and all windows
>"free" and I will prepay the service charge for three years.
> Finally found one that did it. They make their money on
>the monthly service charges, not on the equipment.

Now, that is the way to go. No sense having a partial alarm system. It's almost as bad as having none at all. So, I guess it doesn't narrow anything down as to prior criminal experience on the part of the offender. The information about the security packages is easily available. By the indications in the note, the offender was interested in security measures.


#16, RE: Package deals
Posted by Evening2 on Jan-31-04 at 06:42 PM
In response to message #15
LAST EDITED ON Jan-31-04 AT 06:43 PM (EST)
 
Yes, the offender seemed to be knowledgeable and interested in security measures. Also, something I learned, is that a "broken" window will not make the alarm go off,,,only opening an armed window or door will.

So, perhaps the night of the party, the killer inspected the doors and windows with the intention of entering by breaking a window but found there was one already broken,,,less risk for the perp.


#17, What should Keenan do?
Posted by Saluda on Jan-31-04 at 06:51 PM
In response to message #3
This thread seems to have gotten off onto a track about who had keys. Please get back on track?

What should Keenan and her team be doing?


#18, RE: What should Keenan do?
Posted by Evening2 on Jan-31-04 at 07:15 PM
In response to message #17
They should follow the evidence,,,when they do, they will see that it leads straight to the McReynolds.

#19, RE: What should Keenan do?
Posted by Saluda on Jan-31-04 at 07:47 PM
In response to message #18
>They should follow the evidence,,,when they do, they will
>see that it leads straight to the McReynolds.

Evening,
Are you assuming that Keenan and Company have not yet compared McReynolds' genotypes or all of his family's genotypes to the perp's genotypes that were sent in to CODSIS?

Or that if they have made such comparisons, that even if they may have a match, that they are not revealing it for some reason?

Or are you assuming that the DNA/genotyping is not relevant?


#20, RE: What should Keenan do?
Posted by Evening2 on Jan-31-04 at 07:55 PM
In response to message #19
Yes, all of the above, and that the DNA, although relavent, may very well have been planted,,,and, I would imagine that is something that is also being investigated.

#21, RE: What should Keenan do?
Posted by Margoo on Jan-31-04 at 08:25 PM
In response to message #20
Planted DNA? In THIS case? I really don't think so.

The DNA in THIS case comes from JonBenét's fingernails and the panties. I REALLY do doubt someone planted blood in those tiny blood spots on her panties or dipped her fingers in something to misdirect the DNA. Planted DNA would be more believable if it came from relatively fresh blood spots (or semen) on the blanket or nightgown or her clothing or on the carpet or ... - but not mixed with her own DNA in her panties and under her fingernails.


#22, RE: What should Keenan do?
Posted by Evening2 on Jan-31-04 at 08:32 PM
In response to message #21
Just as surely as you don't think DNA was planted, in this case, I can't believe it was not. I can't believe the killer was one who did not know the family and JonBenet; didn't know his way around the house; planned this crime so very carefully as to have gone undetected for seven years and the reason for that being a perp who is so far removed from the family that no one would suspect him.

Now, which one is more hard to believe??? That DNA was planted by a well planning, clever, coniving perp? ,,, or by some unknown person who has been and will continue to be off the radar screen?


#23, Planted dna?
Posted by DonBradley on Jan-31-04 at 08:36 PM
In response to message #21
Although there is always a question of planting evidence at a crime scene, I think it is highly unlikely.
Aside from the skill involved one would wonder why such minute amounts rather than a clearly exculpable amount. Simply go to a seedy part of town and pick up a recently discarded item or take some homeless bum home for a free meal, collect some of his blood in a plastic container and make sure his free meal is his last one.

How would there be epithelial cells under the nails and blood in the panties if each had been planted?

If it took them until 1999 to test that second spot would you want to be the person who was waiting for the dna to exonerate him?


#24, RE: Planted dna?
Posted by Evening2 on Jan-31-04 at 08:42 PM
In response to message #23
We cannot assume that the DNA was not planted, and, if it was, we cannot assume the donor was alive at the time of this crime. The DNA could first have been planted in JBR's panties after which time she probably touched that area which might be why one of her wrists was no longer bound.

My guess, the donor DNA was from a previous victim of the killer,,,maybe from that other little special friend of Bill McReynolds.


#25, RE: Planted dna?
Posted by Margoo on Jan-31-04 at 08:44 PM
In response to message #23
Whether or not the perp knew this family well, barely at all, or not at all or was cunning or ... has very little to do with the concept of planting DNA and the DNA evidence in THIS case.

#26, RE: Planted dna?
Posted by Evening2 on Jan-31-04 at 09:00 PM
In response to message #25
I believe it has everything to do with it. A perp who knew the family well, as this one did, would be sure to not leave his own DNA at the crime scene but would instead leave the DNA of someone else. Not just anyone else,,,not some unknown homeless person,,,but someone who would not be in a database and someone who will eventually link him to this crime,,,but ONLY when and if LE looks in that direction.


#27, RE: Planted dna?
Posted by Ashley on Jan-31-04 at 09:04 PM
In response to message #25
My guess, the donor DNA was from a previous victim of the killer,,,maybe from that other little special friend of Bill McReynolds.

You're kidding, right. How could that possibly happen? The dna was under her fingernails and mixed with HER blood.


#28, RE: Planted dna?
Posted by Evening2 on Jan-31-04 at 09:05 PM
In response to message #27
I'm not kidding,,,from my Post #24

"We cannot assume that the DNA was not planted, and, if it was, we cannot assume the donor was alive at the time of this crime. The DNA could first have been planted in JBR's panties after which time she probably touched that area which might be why one of her wrists was no longer bound."


#29, RE: Planted dna?
Posted by Evening2 on Jan-31-04 at 09:24 PM
In response to message #28
Keenan, et al need to fully investigate Bill and Janet McReynolds. They need to go to Donna, Texas and all of the places Bill has lived, taught, worked, etc. and the same for Janet. They need to compare deaths in those locations and missing children-teens. They need to check out their travels and deaths and missings in those locations. They need to find out more about their previous marriages and spouses. They need to check out and interview all of their children. They need to check his military record. They need to pinpoint any times unaccounted for in his adult life. See if there was a juvenile record if not expunged. They should also meet with that private detective, Peterson. The list goes on and on. Should they do this for any other suspects you ask? No. Only the McReynolds since that is where the evidence leads.

#30, RE: Planted dna?
Posted by Saluda on Jan-31-04 at 09:28 PM
In response to message #28
The DNA was not planted under JonBenet's fingernails. It was not planted in her underpants.

DNA may have been planted by LE in the oj case with the EDTA on it - material that was entered into evidence.

But not under JonBenet's fingernails.

So, then, how was it planted in her underpants? What is the scenario?


#31, RE: Planted dna?
Posted by Evening2 on Jan-31-04 at 09:31 PM
In response to message #30
LAST EDITED ON Jan-31-04 AT 10:14 PM (EST)
 
By using a syringe after she was violated with the paintbrush and then her hand (nails) were rubbed against the combined spots of bloods - the spots that contained both her DNA and "foreign" DNA. Is that so difficult to imagine?

#32, RE: Planted dna?
Posted by Ashley on Jan-31-04 at 10:12 PM
In response to message #31
Is that so difficult to imagine?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>yes, it is for me! In fact, I'm laughing my ass off. Sorry, I don't mean to be rude. Don't get mad. I really like you.


#33, RE: Planted dna?
Posted by Evening2 on Jan-31-04 at 10:15 PM
In response to message #32
This, from the same person who thinks SB stands for Sandra Bullock. LOL,,,I'm not mad,,,I like you too.

#34, RE: How would you plant DNA?
Posted by Evening2 on Jan-31-04 at 10:16 PM
In response to message #33
Okay, you don't like my scenario? How would you plant the DNA in this case? Anyone? Everyone?

#35, RE: How would you plant DNA?
Posted by Ashley on Jan-31-04 at 10:30 PM
In response to message #34
Hehehe...you got me there!

It's not impossible, I will give you that. I honestly can't think of a better way ;)


#36, OK. Have we exhausted the list for Keen
Posted by Saluda on Jan-31-04 at 11:38 PM
In response to message #17
LAST EDITED ON Jan-31-04 AT 11:38 PM (EST)
 
Well, we've gone down the path of planted DNA on JonBenet, and other trails about the house security, enough I think.

Can we come up with other leads and aspects - what we think Kennan and her team should work on? This is not to say they are not working hard. It is so that that the DA's office will never run out of significant leads or things they should follow up on. And also to give them our input as to what is important to follow up on.

In particular, could we we discuss further some of the many suggestions that have already been made here? To place some emphasis on the most important ones, please.


#37, The list for Keenan
Posted by Saluda on Jan-31-04 at 11:43 PM
In response to message #36
I really think we could make a good list here for DA Keenan. The responding posts at the beginning of this thread was especially good, and there were some good posts later also.

#38, RE: Very Important
Posted by Evening2 on Jan-31-04 at 11:44 PM
In response to message #36
Here's one more very important area Keenan and Bennett should pursue. They should find out where Bill McReynolds liked to take his walks on the beach near Mashpee, MA and then start digging in that same area. Perhaps he used to sit on a bench and work the New York Times crossword puzzle. It's time they "uncovered" those things that Janet said have yet to be uncovered.

#39, RE: Very Important
Posted by Ashley on Jan-31-04 at 11:50 PM
In response to message #38
I think they should haul Joe B Jr's butt in for more intense questioning, test his dna and handwriting again, if they haven't already. Make him take a lie detector test (we already know he lies to cops).


#40, RE: Key to the case.
Posted by DonBradley on Feb-01-04 at 08:13 AM
In response to message #3
>Someone who was overlooked the first time is more likely.
Thats why the important thing is for DA-Keenan to do exactly what is being done: a thorough review of the file to determine what was undone and which 'ends are too loose'.

I think one area that not fully explored was the tack the police took originally when they were asking John Ramsey questions about who do you owe money too, who has a beef with you, etc. The cops were on the right track: they were looking for someone with a motive. I think if the BPD can go back and interview the fourth grade teacher of Patsy Ramsey they should go that far back looking for persons holding a grudge and having a very slow burning fuse. I don't think 'recent events' played a role in this at all.

I know there is a difference between a small, rather insular English village and a major city such as Boulder, Colorado but I wonder if massive screening might be useful. Get more data on the dna and find out what other, less often tested, markers there are. Not just the standard loci but try to see what information is available from all the dna they have.



#41, RE: Key to the case.
Posted by Evening2 on Feb-05-04 at 08:07 PM
In response to message #40
Key to the case might be for Mary Keenan to have John Nash and a panel of psychiatrists examine the note.

#42, RE: Key to the case.
Posted by Evening2 on Feb-06-04 at 02:32 PM
In response to message #41
John Nash and Bill McReynolds were interested in the same type of people,,,

"Nash was looking for emotional partners who were more interested in giving than receiving, and Eleanor, was very much that sort."


#43, RE: December 26, 1962
Posted by Evening2 on Feb-06-04 at 04:24 PM
In response to message #42
"Coincidence"


"John Nash and Alicia Larde married in February 1957. Their son, John Charles Martin Nash, born May 20, 1959, remained nameless for a year. On the day after Christmas in 1962, Alicia filed for divorce."

Note: This is the second son fathered by John Nash who was named "John". He also had an illegitimate son by Eleanor. The son born to the marriage of John Nash and Alicia Larde also developed Schizophrenia.


#44, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Evening2 on Feb-12-04 at 02:52 AM
In response to message #43
Mary Keenan should investigate the current email address of Bill McReynolds. On February 4, 2004, there is an email address for
william.mcreynolds@verizon.net. Now, if he's been dead for nearly two years, why does he still have a current email address?

#45, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Margoo on Feb-12-04 at 05:13 AM
In response to message #44
You don't seriously believe that there is ONLY ONE William McReynolds, do you? The name William is very common and the name McReynolds is common enough. Just as there are OTHER John Ramseys, there are OTHER William McReynolds.

#46, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Mikie on Feb-12-04 at 10:33 AM
In response to message #45
True, Margoo

Maybe he was the same William McReynolds that died in the Titanic?
http://www.encyclopedia-titanica.org/detail.php/1585.html

Someone told me that when Joe DiMaggio died, he actually didn't. His son looked a lot like him and was an alcoholic who looked older than his age. Also Joe DiMaggio looked younger than his age. So when the young Joe died, the old Joe pretended to be the son and is still alive today. I don't know if there is any truth to it, but stranger things have happened.


#47, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Evening2 on Feb-12-04 at 11:14 AM
In response to message #46
Well Margoo, you're right, there is more than one Bill McReynolds, however, the one I'm referring to with the email has a business/home on Falmouth Rd in Mashpee, MA. The business is a publisher and has published a book of poems by Janet McReynolds.

#48, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by DonBradley on Feb-12-04 at 11:38 AM
In response to message #47
No law says a widow has to cancel her deceased spouse's email account.

#49, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Evening2 on Feb-12-04 at 11:54 AM
In response to message #48
You're kidding, Don! I didn't know that! Janet McReynolds, being the feminist that she is, would certainly not have her own email account, now that I think about it. How silly of me to think otherwise.

#50, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Margoo on Feb-12-04 at 02:20 PM
In response to message #49
Well, I don't quite know what you might be thinking, Evening. Why don't you tell us rather than have us list a series of questions that might have nothing to do with whatever it is you are thinking.

#51, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Evening2 on Feb-12-04 at 02:51 PM
In response to message #50
LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-04 AT 03:12 PM (EST)
 
Well, for starters, maybe Bill McReynolds isn't dead afterall. I mean, how could we know for sure? The "burial" was private. Also, of interest, I read some of the "reviews" of Janet's book of poems and one was written by an Annette Woodall-Leffingwell. The child that Bill and Janet had together, Jill, is married and her last name is also Leffingwell, so I guess her husband and Annette's husband are related. It's a small world after all.

I think Mary Keenan and Tom Bennett should look into this book of poems as well as looking into the "death" of Bill McReynolds.

Edited to add: Think about it. What's the ONLY way to commit the perfect crime and be certain that you would never, ever, be caught? Well, IMO, the answer is for the killer to "die" himself, and yet be able to sit back and still wallow in the limelight of the crime. And that's what I think Bill McReynold's is doing right now!


#52, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Margoo on Feb-12-04 at 04:11 PM
In response to message #51
How does Bill keep his non-death a secret? Do his children, their spouses, his grandchildren know? Or, does he live a life with NO contact with anyone who might reveal his "secret"? That would be a very sad way to live and maybe not a life really worth living. What's your take on it?

#53, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Evening2 on Feb-12-04 at 05:08 PM
In response to message #52
My take is that is exactly the type of life Bill would find truly fulfilling. He and Janet seem to thrive off of each other. Bill stated that he felt closer to JonBenet than he does his own children and grandchildren so having no contact with them would suit him to the letter. I'm sure Bill has changed his appearance and he and Janet meet in "secret",,,how exciting! My take is that each of them spends most of their days on the internet, acting like "cyberair traffic controllers",,,directing and controlling. Oh what a marvelous power trip!

#54, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by jameson on Feb-12-04 at 05:16 PM
In response to message #53
I would maintain my husband's email account as that is where family sends messages to us. Mine is pretty much Ramsey - and my son's is full of the homeschool business.

I don't think it is strange at all that his account would remain active. Easier to keep it than to change it - especially if it was the master account.


#55, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Evening2 on Feb-12-04 at 05:45 PM
In response to message #54
Actually, this is the first time I have seen that particular email addy for Bill McReynolds. And, according to Janet, they didn't even own a "working computer",,,yeah, right!

#56, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Margoo on Feb-12-04 at 06:23 PM
In response to message #55
LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-04 AT 06:36 PM (EST)
 
the one I'm referring to with the email has a business/home on Falmouth Rd in Mashpee, MA.

This particular email addy (william.mcreynolds@verizon.net) takes you to R R Bowker LLC.


#57, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Margoo on Feb-12-04 at 06:30 PM
In response to message #56
LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-04 AT 06:38 PM (EST)
 
This business (Lost River Press) appears to be owned by R R Bowker, LLC (limited liability corporation/company). Evening, you knew that, though, right?

http://www.bowkerlink.com/corrections/common/home.asp

http://www.bowker.com/bowkerweb/products/products.asp

Do you think Bowker and the other employees know about Bill McReynolds?


#58, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Evening2 on Feb-12-04 at 07:09 PM
In response to message #57
Yes, Margoo, I knew that. And no, I don't think other employees know,,,if there are other employees.

#59, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Margoo on Feb-12-04 at 07:12 PM
In response to message #58
Evening, this is a Limited Liability Company that requires proper licensing, registration, bookkeeping, etc. What do you mean Bowker and the other employees don't know? WHAT ARE you thinking?

#60, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Evening2 on Feb-12-04 at 07:22 PM
In response to message #59
Margoo, I'm talking about Lost River Press. That's the publisher.

#61, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Margoo on Feb-12-04 at 08:14 PM
In response to message #60
Oh, my apologies, I thought you were talking about Bill McReynolds.

#62, RE: Hmmmm?
Posted by Evening2 on Feb-12-04 at 08:17 PM
In response to message #61
It appears that Lost River Press is a publishing company owned by Bill McReynolds. I was speaking of Bill McReynolds and Lost River Press, not RR Bowker. Sorry for any confusion.

#63, RE: Leffingwell,,,Hmmm!
Posted by Evening2 on Feb-13-04 at 09:25 PM
In response to message #62
In reference to Post #51, there is another Leffingwell (Mark) who is employed at the same paper in Boulder that once employed Janet McReynolds. Oh well, I guess, like McReynolds, Leffingwell is a very common name. Guess the Boulder print media had this case "wrapped up" from the get-go.

#64, RE: Leffingwell,,,Hmmm!
Posted by Rainsong on Feb-14-04 at 00:28 AM
In response to message #63
In response to post #30: "By using a syringe after she was violated with the paintbrush and then her hand (nails) were rubbed against the combined spots of bloods - the spots that contained both her DNA and "foreign" DNA. Is that so difficult to imagine?"

If JonBenet's fingers had been rubbed against the spots of blood, she would have had blood on her fingers. She did not or it would have been noted in the autopsy report.

I did a search for 'perpetrator planted DNA' and came up empty. It's a wonderful device for a novelist, but killers are not going to take the time to concoct such a scheme. They're too damned busy planning the murder.

Rainsong


#65, RE: Leffingwell,,,Hmmm!
Posted by Margoo on Feb-14-04 at 03:39 AM
In response to message #64
The DNA could first have been planted in JBR's panties after which time she probably touched that area which might be why one of her wrists was no longer bound."


This statement is made twice in this thread and should be cleared up, IMO. When John found JonBenét, both hands were tied.

JBTPF - p 306
LS: What else you remember right at that time?
JR: I just remember talking and, "Come on baby." And I tried to untie her arms. They were tied up behind her head ....
LS: Were they tied tight?
JR: Yeah, very tight ....


DOI pb - p 22

I can't stand the sight of her hands tied and have to do something to get them loose. I start untying her, but I can't get the tight knot undone. Everything begins to blur and I'm slipping out of my mind and losing control. ~snip~


#66, JR didn't notice the garrote?
Posted by Maikai on Feb-14-04 at 08:49 AM
In response to message #65
Neither Arndt nor JR or anyone else that was present when JBR was brought upstairs ever mentioned seeing the garrote. If the end was just hanging, the cord and broken paintbrush would have been hard to miss, don't you think? Unless the end of the garrote was somehow camouflaged--ie: the end stuck through the cord around JBR's neck, and the rest was tangled in her hair?