Decade Of Mystery: John Ramsey Speaks

JonBenet's Father Breaks His Silence Since His Wife's Passing, The Karr Arrest

(CBS) 
The James Bond chase around the globe did not have the Hollywood ending that John Ramsey had prayed for. "I was hopeful that this in fact was the right guy. But on the other hand, it had to be the right guy, you know. We were not just out looking for somebody to hang," Ramsey says.

Ramsey and John Mark Karr share a curious link: both have been branded as suspects in the killing of six-year-old JonBenet.

The public believes that Karr walked free because of a DNA test and that begs the question: why weren’t the Ramseys exonerated for the very same reason?

"The decision was made that day, the 26th of December 1996, that I was the killer. And then it became 'Okay well, then now let’s look at the evidence and let’s prove it.' And then of course, then it shifted to Patsy for some unknown reason," Ramsey says.

It turns out that the couple who spent a decade under the umbrella of suspicion, could have been cleared years ago.

Documents prepared by former assistant D.A. Trip Demuth years ago show what he called, the other side of the story. He believed that there were serious flaws in the case against the Ramseys.

Demuth was very surprised that 48 Hours had obtained the documents. "I’m actually, I’m shocked. I’m just shocked," he told Moriarty.

It was a lot of evidence that the public was never aware of.

"I really would appreciate it if you would mention that you came into this information from some other source than myself," Demuth said.

That’s true: 48 Hours obtained the documents from another source. They include crime scene evidence, police reports, and laboratory analysis of DNA.

"That report in essence says as of January 15th, 1997, there was a strong suggestion by the DNA results that the Ramseys were not responsible for this murder," Demuth says.

"You’re saying that less than a month after this murder was committed that there is DNA evidence that indicates that the Ramseys weren’t involved?" Moriarty asks.

"I’m saying that there is DNA evidence that creates a strong suggestion that they may not have done it, yes," he replies.

A Colorado Bureau of Investigation report shows that tiny amounts of DNA were found under JonBenet's fingernails and in her underwear, and that this DNA did not match John, Patsy, or anyone in the Ramsey family. Police at the time were not convinced that the DNA found at the scene belonged to the killer.

Trip Demuth interpreted the evidence differently. "How likely is it that it would be anybody but the killer? I think it’s highly unlikely that it would be anybody else but the killer," he says.

"I believe that when the case first started that it did look like the Ramseys did this. I even thought that initially when I was hired on board," says former detective Lou Smit.

He says at first, he wasn’t convinced the Ramseys were innocent and went along with the police theory, which was that Patsy killed her daughter accidentally out of frustration; that the garrote was placed around JonBenet’s neck to make it look like someone else had strangled her.

"The theory was that JonBenet was killed by Patsy over bed wetting and that all of this was staged. And that as a result of the staging that a ransom note, a very detailed ransom note was made. That the garrote was constructed for some reason to make it look like it was a kidnap killing gone bad, that was all part of the staging," Smit says.