WHY NO BOOK BY L"FOX"Smit?

[Blazeboy3]

This intrigues me...no book by the "FOX" Lou Smit? WHY NOT?!

[gretchen]

A very good question Blazeboy.

Although I do not agree with Lou's intruder theory, and I believe he is prejudiced toward the Ramsey's, I think Lou does not want to be so blatant about his theory. He may not have written a book but he has been on t.v. citing his his intruder theory. I do believe Lou thinks the Ramsey's are not involved in JonBenet's murder. I think his religious beliefs defy that a "Christian" famlily could commit such a horrific crime. I am not questioning the Ramsey's are Christians, but even the most devout are not perfect.

[Blazeboy3]

Ditto! I totally agree w/your post! ... in the R's eyes:See No Evil...hear no Evil.. and all w/be "just/fine?!".justification?!

[SisterSocks]

Originally posted by Blazeboy3
This intrigues me...no book by the "FOX" Lou Smit? WHY NOT?!

Because Blaze, this man is alot smarter than any of the other money hungey fools No intrigue involved just good western common sence. :laugh:

[popcorn]

I don't think Smit can write a book if he can't name a suspect. He can only tell you who he thinks it isn't. I don't think he could physically write a book either as his command of the spoken language is less than choice. I'm beginning to think he was hired by Hunter as a ringer or ploy? I'm not sure of the word, but Smit was used. Hunter knew from the get go he was an old timer with inabilities.

Lou is no saint and still wants to cash in, he's been reported to be working on some sort of software which can be more lucerative than a book.

[sissi]

I would wager Smit is more honorable than those that made a decision to cash in on the murder of a child.
It may just be about...ethics..morals...values...

JMO IMO

[Show Me]

Because Lou has already given out all the evidence in articles, television and interviews....nothing left to tell.

[sissi]

Is it possible for someone to detail what Smit has told?
Clearly he has discussed information already available in the press,but just what new info was leaked by him?
IMO

[Ivy]

Maybe when Smit and Keenan at last hone in on the owner of the "foreign" DNA that was found in JonBenet's underpants, Smit, with the help of the Ramseys' ghost writer, will describe the events that led to the person's capture, in a book titled Bus Chronicles: The Hunt for Sum Yung Gai.

[Barbara]

Lou Smit does not need to write a book. He has nothing left to tell that isn't public knowledge already.

BUT

Being the mouthpiece with his powerpoint presentation has brought him what money could not buy: Fame. Who heard of Lou Smit before the Ramsey case? Nobody! Now everyone knows his name and if he should choose, can charge a pretty penny for his consultations in the future now that he's retired.

The Ramseys turned out to be an investment for him (if he so chooses) He could also use his fame to forward causes for his religion, church and anything else he decides on.

No, he doesn't need a book with all the stress that comes with it. And...he has nothing left to dazzle anyone with regarding the Ramsey case

[Britt]

I basically agree with Popcorn and Show Me.

But the reason I really think Smit hasn't written a book is because deep down he knows the Ramseys are involved. He doesn't want to believe it, but I think he does, and he can't bring himself to present that intruder theory in the permanent form of a book.

The only thing Smit ever said that really got my attention was this: People say there was only four people in the house that day... What the case tells me is that there’s a fifth personality there. There’s a fifth personality that is a very brutal, vicious personality [who] killed JonBenet.

Lou Smit Today Show Interview May 4, 2001 (http://www.acandyrose.com/05042001lousmit-todayshow.htm)

IMO it is significant that he says "personality" and not "person"... and not once, but three times. Smit could be right about that. As others have suggested (BrotherMoon, for one) Patsy may have a "split" personality - a dissociative disorder... there could very well be a fifth personality just like Smit says.

Originally posted by sissi
I would wager Smit is more honorable than those that made a decision to cash in on the murder of a child.
If it's okay for the Ramseys to do it, I'm sure Smit would have no problem rationalizing his own book.

As Barbara points out, he has already cashed in anyway.

[TLynn]

Smit couldn't put his "theory" in writing - it would be laughable.

Yeah, Lou, Jonbenet woke up in the middle of the night and ate pineapple from a tubberware in her bedroom - a tubberware with no trace of pineapple with the pineapple on the downstairs counter.

Yeah, Lou, let's hear your incredible theory - not just bits and pieces of this and that....TIE IT TOGETHER, Smit.

Not possible. No book.

[SisterSocks]

Look Lou is actively investigating the Murder of JB. He not the idiot that Thomas was.

[Barbara]

Originally posted by SisterSocks
Look Lou is actively investigating the Murder of JB. He not the idiot that Thomas was.

7 years later and still no intruder. I guess he's not the fox that everyone says he is. Actively investigating????????

What is he doing?

[why_nutt]

Originally posted by Barbara
7 years later and still no intruder. I guess he's not the fox that everyone says he is. Actively investigating????????

What is he doing?

The evidence indicates that Smit has been given far more credit for solving homicides than is actually warranted. I have not yet found any proof that he had difficult homicides to investigate; rather, the homicides I have been able to research which took place while he was employed were rather easily solveable, generally within weeks or months of happening. For example, this is the sort of murder Smit has to his credit, as described by the Associated Press, August 17, 1982:

The mother of a 17-year-old bride chased the bride's father through the house at the wedding reception, fired a rifle at him and accidentally killed her new son-in-law, police said yesterday.

Simmons had been married at the Harris home about six hours.
Marvin Simmons, 24, an Army private first class at nearby Fort Carson, was hit in the head by a bullet from the .22-caliber semi-automatic rifle.

Shirley May Harris, 31, the bride's mother, was booked for investigation of homicide, authorities said.

This is a no-brainer, would anyone disagree? There is no intruder involved, just a witnessed shooting which Smit got to place on his plaque as proof of his supposedly-superior detective skills. The Heather Dawn Church case was also not an example of skill on Smit's part; it was bad recordkeeping on the part of Colorado authorities which kept Heather's killer, Robert Browne, from being picked up right after the crime was committed, at a time when Smit was not employed and would not have been involved with the case. If the killer's fingerprints had been on file in Colorado, as they should have been after Browne was on parole from a crime he had committed in Louisiana, Smit would not even be a footnote in the Ramsey case.

[TLynn]

Hey, don't be so hard on Lou "the stungun" Smit - he can still struggle through a basement window.

[Blazeboy3]

Originally posted by gretchen
A very good question Blazeboy.

Although I do not agree with Lou's intruder theory, and I believe he is prejudiced toward the Ramsey's, I think Lou does not want to be so blatant about his theory. He may not have written a book but he has been on t.v. citing his his intruder theory. I do believe Lou thinks the Ramsey's are not involved in JonBenet's murder. I think his religious beliefs defy that a "Christian" famlily could commit such a horrific crime. I am not questioning the Ramsey's are Christians, but even the most devout are not perfect. \\


HERE IS YOUR ANSWER TO YOUR JONBENET QUESTION...WANTED or not...!!!


http://207.36.4.219/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1773&perpage=25&pagenumber=1


One of the threads asked about a new book on JonBenet Ramsey. I am the author of that book. It's an attempt to do some radically new things in order to shift attention back to what should have remained the focus of this case: the sexual abuse of children and the permanent psychological damage done when one sexualize a child in the way children are sexualized by Child Beauty Pageants. I also want, from the start, to indicate another thing that makes my book distinctive. I will not make a penny from it. I have established a Trust so that all money due me from the book and from productions of the play it contains will be devoted to Organizations who work on behalf of sexually abused children. That said, let me briefly describe the book.. An Evening With JonBenet Ramsey begins with a full-length play, Cowboy's Sweetheart, which imagines the life of a sexually abused and murdered child as it might have evolved had she lived. The play explores her psyche, her experience, and her struggle to deal with the traumatic memories that haunt her. (It tries, in effect, to give JonBenet the life that was taken from here.) The play is followed by two essays. They involve extensive research and consider the JonBenet Ramsey case from a number of perspectives. The discussion includes a critique of the media and of the two theories that have been developed to solve the crime. Again, my effort is to move the discussion to a new level. My name, by the way, is Walter A. Davis and I am a Professor Emeritus in the English Department at The Ohio State University. Like so many of you I first become involved in this story when I first saw a video of JonBenet "performing" and found myself in tears: "How could anyone do that to a child?" I asked. The book is a response to the pain of that question. Those who want the book can get it at a 15% discount on paperback and a 10% discount on hardcover from Xlibris: Call 888-795-4274, ext.276 or order online at www.xlibris.com. Or, of course, from Amazon.com.
I look forward to your responses and as a new member, to making a contribution to your discussions. Warm regards, Walter A. Davis

[River]

Originally posted by sissi
I would wager Smit is more honorable than those that made a decision to cash in on the murder of a child.
It may just be about...ethics..morals...values...
JMO IMO


Sissi, from your above statement, I can reasonably conclude that you don't think anyone should cash in on a murdered child. How do you feel about someone selling information to Don Gentile, of the NE? She wanted a lot more than 40K, but settled after she was told that is all they were worth.

What do you think of that situation?

[Shylock]

Originally posted by TLynn
Hey, don't be so hard on Lou "the stungun" Smit - he can still struggle through a basement window. Yeah, that's always been one of the problems. Despite the fact that skinny Smit and Fatjams made it through the window, not one of the RST has the brains to figure out that since the suit case was under the window on the INSIDE of the house, the intruder went OUT the window, not IN.
And nobody has ever made it through that window from the inside out.

[ajt400]

Good point, I have never looked at it that way....

[TLynn]

Excellent point, Shylock - another reason why Smit couldn't write a book - it would get people thinking.

[vicktor]

Originally posted by popcorn
I don't think Smit can write a book if he can't name a suspect. He can only tell you who he thinks it isn't. I don't think he could physically write a book either as his command of the spoken language is less than choice. I'm beginning to think he was hired by Hunter as a ringer or ploy? I'm not sure of the word, but Smit was used. Hunter knew from the get go he was an old timer with inabilities.

Lou is no saint and still wants to cash in, he's been reported to be working on some sort of software which can be more lucerative than a book.

From everything I have read Lou Smit was recruited because he was independent and he had a 90% success rate of solving the 200+ homicides he worked on in Colorado Springs. Unlike so many of the 'experts' who have injected themselves into the case and offered opinions based on second hand information and facsimilies of evidence, his work has been pretty much low key. The most recent article I read about him in the Denver papers described his pursuits as working out at the YMCA and later working on the Ramsey case. He said he had 60 or 70 possible suspects to evaluate and check on.

[ajt400]

See, the hardest thing I have trouble believing is that 2 people with the records that John Douglas and Lou Smit would just except money over justice for little girl. I don't really think either would do it. Could anyone prove anything in either's past or work record that would say they might accept a bribe? Could it really have been that much money? With everyone they have supposedly paid off, how much money do they have?Who all have they alledgedly paid off?:(

[Maxi]

I don't believe either of them was paid off. It looks to me as if Smit is trying to reprise his most famous case. And I think John Douglas took a position early on and is sticking to it.

[Britt]

Originally posted by Maxi
I don't believe either of them was paid off. It looks to me as if Smit is trying to reprise his most famous case. And I think John Douglas took a position early on and is sticking to it.
I agree. It wasn't about money. It was about E-G-O.

[Maikai]

Lou's career is a lot more than the JBR Ramsey case. His strength is in organizing case files, and he is the one they called for cold cases...he was successful because of the way he could analyze evidence from a crime scene.

Lou was instrumental in finding the killer's of Kelsey Grammar's sister in Colorado Springs, in 1975. She was abducted, raped, and murdered. Kelsey was only 20 at the time, and his career had not yet taken off. He flew to Colorado Springs to identify his beloved sister's body, and attended the trial.

It would be a good book--not about the Ramsey case only--but his long, successful career.

[Maikai]

Some of the cases:

"Smit's track record includes catching the killer of Karen Grammer --
actor Kelsey Grammer's sister -- a 1975 case he cracked, in part,
by his habit of driving by the crime scene every morning to sip his
coffee, say a little prayer and hope he may notice something he
missed before.

In this case, the scene was an alley. After two or three weeks of
his morning visits, Smit was struck by the idea that the killer,
instead of running out of the alley after the crime, went down the
dead-end to an apartment complex. That seemingly minor notion
led him to solving the case.

Reviewing the files of a 1982 case, he noticed a three-year-old
note from a Florida police officer who said he had caught a man
involved in a shopping-center murder case similar to the one Smit
was reviewing in Colorado Springs. According to the letter, the
man once lived in Colorado.

Smit ran a check, but the man had no Colorado criminal record.
Just to be sure, Smit checked traffic offenses and hit pay dirt.
Three days before the slaying, the man had received a traffic
ticket on the west side of town, placing him near the scene of the
crime.

After a little more snooping, Smit visited the suspect in Florida,
broke the ice with some cigarettes, then bluffed. The man
confessed.

In perhaps Smit's most famous case -- and one with similarities to
JonBenet's -- he cracked the 1991 kidnapping and murder of
13-year-old Heather Dawn Church simply by taking another look
at old evidence.

Studying the case three-and-a-half years later, Smit found two
things: a crime scene photograph showing a window screen
slightly out of alignment and a set of fingerprints taken off the
window that had never been identified. Police had tried to match
the prints, but Smit wanted to try again.

He had them plugged into additional databases. After searches
through more than 90 local and state archives, police agencies in
California and Louisiana showed matches. The fingerprints
belonged to a man living just a half-mile away from the Church
home.

Robert Charles Browne confessed that he killed Heather when
she surprised him during a burglary. The conviction exonerated
the father, Mike Church, who had been under suspicion in the
case. "

(snippet from a new article that didn't identify where it came from)

[Blazeboy3]

Originally posted by SisterSocks
Because Blaze, this man is alot smarter than any of the other money hungey fools No intrigue involved just good western common sence. :laugh:

Ok and so that means:?...what?!hello?1; ok SS:read what you posted/wrote and ask yourself "what does this have to do w/JonBenet and finding her killer/monster? and then post/reply if you can?!?! ... IMHO you're bypassing (understandibly) the issue/core reason for what happened(it's common among most to justify what thy can't comprehend because of the tragic trama involved ...) ... ?!?