◆ SpookStack

7 , Page 2 of 6 le 3 Ramsey's home and murdered their child. Specifically, there was a broken§#dow in the basement and 3 window well for that window showed signs that someone may have entered the house through it. Indeed, ime of the foliage and debris from that window well was found in the room where JonBenet's body was und. Further, the evidence of stun gun injuries to JonBenet suggests that she was taken by someone who anted to keep her quiet as he removed her from her bedroom; a parent would not need a stun gun to remove child from her bedroom. Conversely, the use of a stun’ gun by the killer is totally at odds with plaintiffs theory iat the violence against JonBenet began by Mrs. Ramsey accidentally hit her daughter's head on the bathtub r bathroom floor. In addition, the presence of a bag containing a rope in a guest bedroom near JonBenet s rguably supports a notion that some premeditation and preparation attended the crime. )ther physical evidence is consistent with a theory that an intruder was in the home. There was a recently nade shoeprint, in a moldy area in the basement, that matched no shoes owned by the Ramseys. There was liso a palmprint on the door to the small room eee Page 84 here JonBenet's body was found that did not match the Ramseys' prints. DNA evidence was further consistent with the possibility of an intruder, as JonBenet had the DNA of an unknown male under some of her fingernails and on her underpants. The evidence also indicated that JonBenet had been sexually assaulted and her vagina contained wood fibers from the paint brush used to fashion the garotte. The method by which JonBenet was killed also suggests it more likely that she was killed by an intruder than by her mother. JonBenet was strangled through the use of a garotte and bondage device that was sophisticated and employed the use of a series of tightly and neatly made knots that would appear to have taken some time to make. There is no evidence that the defendants had the skill to create such a device. Moreover, it is plaintiffs theory’ that, after thinking she had accidentally killed her daughter, Mrs. Ramsey worked quickly, before the household awoke, to set up a staged kidnapping scenario. The creation of this bondage device would appear to have required more time and calm than one would think Mrs. Ramsey could have mustered under the circumstances. Plaintiff has the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the Ramseys murdered their child; they have no burden to prove that they did not commit the crime. The above recited evidence falls well short of the requisite proof that the Page 85 defendants killed their child. Plaintiff argues, however, that the Ransom Note provides this necessary proof. At first blush, and even without an appraisal of the handwriting, the Ransom Note seems to support plaintiff's argument that the kidnapping was a hoax set up by someone in the house. It is an extremely long and detailed note of over three pages. Moreover, an examination of the notepad on which the note was written indicates that the writer had attempted some earlier drafts of the note. In addition, the writer had apparently not even brought his own materials, but instead had used a note pad and felt marker from the Ramsey's home. These facts suggest that the killer had not come prepared with a ransom note already written, as one would expect a diligent kidnapper to do. Further, one does not assume that an intruder, intent on beating a hasty retreat, would take the time to practice writing a note or to write a long, detailed note. These assumptions then might suggest that someone in the house contrived the note. http:/www.angelfire.com/ar3/jonbenet/judgecarnes9. htm! 5/10/2005