Are the Ramseys involved or not?

DeeDee249 said:

I never said it was Joe Barnhill who heard the scream. I SAID it was Stanton, and her husband heard the metal scraping concrete. Did you not read my post you quoted where I said "she"? Joe Barnhill said he saw JAR going into the house.
Stanton claimed to HEAR the scream FIRST. You realize your link is to a WIKIPEDIA article, and Wiki is not edited for mistakes- anyone can write anything and put it on Wiki. Wikipedia is a source of much MIS-information, not only on this case, but much else, do don't presume to lecture ME on spreading misinformation.

Click to expand...

My mistake you are right you didn't say it was Barnhill , sorry.

The link is to the JonBenet Encyclopedia , the reference for the police missing this out of her statement is in Steve Thomas's book, so it was the police who missed that part out of her original statment.

I don't think for one minute this woman heard a scream.

BTW I wasn't lecturing you on anythin , I was stating my opinion!

Here's what Detective Steve Thomas said about Melody Stanton and the scream -


From his book, JonBenet:Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, page 193:


"One night we tried to figure out if the parents could have heard JonBenet scream. While some of us stayed in the master suite, Detective Gosage tiptoed through the dark house, then shouted. His shout was clearly audible to me, but Trip DeMuth said it was difficult to hear. We could even hear a shout from the basement, although our intruder theorists could not.

But we all agreed that Melody Stanton, the neighbor who claimed to have heard a scream, "obviously that of a child," on Christmas night, could have done so. I wanted to go over right then and dig deeper into her story, but Deputy DA DeMuth refused, putting a blockade between police and Melody Stanton. He said he planned to "prep her" before trial. DeMuth didn't explain his reasons to mere police officers and detectives. I could not fathom why a prosecutor would intentionally stop us from talking to her. Such a thing had never happened before in any investigation I was involved in, but with a wave of his hand - poof! - DeMuth sealed off an important avenue of investigation from the investigators. *snip*"


So...does Thomas mean that DeMuth, the Deputy DA, is tampering with the witness...?





As to the report, I looked up where the wikipedia link drew the excerpt from Thomas's book, and it is transcribed correctly according to my copy of ST's book. Thomas writes (page 72):


"More than a year later we would discover that Stanton also told the detective, “It may not have been an audible scream but rather the negative energy radiating from JonBenet.”

The detective returned to that odd point several times during the interview, but Stanton never again mentioned the “negative energy”. She insisted that she heard an audible scream, so the detective did not include the “negative energy” comment in his report.

A year later he was ordered to write an amended report. Changing a report is a huge issue for police since it brings the validity of the entire statement into question His revised report was not the first, and it would not be the last, that would enter the Ramsey case file."




Thomas does not name the detective who interviewed Melody Stanton...but it doesn't sound to me as though the detective did anything wrong in only including what MS could insist on - an audible scream. ST says the detective returned to that "odd point" several times in his interview with MS, but she only referred to the "negative energy" idea the one time. What can the detective do if MS mentions some "negative energy" comment once in an interview, but will not elaborate on it any more, even when asked about it...yet she "insisted" she heard an audible scream?

IMO, it sounds like the detective wanted his report to include facts, not psychic impressions, especially not ones that the person he is interviewing mention once and only once, even when prompted to further describe her experience in direct relation to the impression she mentioned.

IMO, this detective may not have even fully understood at the time what kind of runaway freight train the Ramsey Murder Investigation would become, and may not have realized how important that one facet could possibly become.






I find also on page 193 - 194:

"Detective Gosage wrote in his official report that he could hear movement and noise, even when people were trying to be quiet, no matter where he stood in the house. Sergeant Wickman told him that Deputy DA DeMuth wanted that report changed. Gosage refused. I found it incomprehensible that any prosecutor would make such a demand, for defense lawyers would pounce on the alteration to paint the cop as unsure of what he saw or heard. DeMuth was putting us on dangerous ground."

FairM said:

DD , just to clarify , you dont have any evidence to back up your view that the witness was tampered with, its just your opinion.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, FairM, there's at least one major incident that we know about where Ramsey defense lawyers tampered with a potential witness. They did a lot MORE than tamper with him!

SuperDave said:

Unfortunately, FairM, there's at least one major incident that we know about where Ramsey defense lawyers tampered with a potential witness. They did a lot MORE than tamper with him!

Click to expand...

will you elaborate on that or point me where to find it?

runsdeep said:

will you elaborate on that or point me where to find it?

Click to expand...

I can elaborate on it 'til the cows come home, runsdeep! It's a sordid and somewhat infuriating tale, a disturbing illustration of just how much power the Haddon law firm wields in Colorado.

Here goes: in mid-1997, Craig Lewis, the GLOBE news editor--if you could call him that--hatched a scheme to buy a copy of the ransom note. The plan was to offer Don Vacca, a Ramsey-hired handwriting expert, a sum of money in exchange for a copy. He hired a local attorney named Thomas Miller (hereafter known as Tom Miller) under false pretenses and put his plan into action. The meeting went down, Lewis made his offer, and Vacca rejected it. Vacca went to the authorities and demanded action, but the Jefferson County DA blew it off. I'm not really sure why; maybe they figured it wasn't worth pursuing.

Well, by the end of that year, Miller, who was also a handwriting expert well-respected in the Colorado court system, got the materials legit and made his conclusion as to who wrote it: Patsy Ramsey.

Here's where it gets interesting. Eventually, word leaked up to Hal Haddon, the senior partner in Haddon, Forman and Morgan, the Ramseys' lawyers. Haddon was friends with Dave Thomas, the Jefferson County DA, and apparently called in a favor. The favor was that, after two full years of the JC DA saying that it wasn't worth pursuing, Lewis and Miller were arrested and charged with commercial bribery, with Lewis getting slapped with extortion to boot.

Miller was puzzled as to why he got hauled in on this beef. It soon became apparent that HE was the real target all along, not Lewis. He saw the handwriting on the wall when he saw how different the plea deals that they were offered were. Lewis got a sweetheart offer: if the GLOBE agreed to make a donation of $100,000 to the University of Colorado, Boulder journalism school, he'd be free and clear. The donation was made, and Craig Lewis walked free that very day. (I wonder why they were so specific on THAT particular school receiving the money. I'm sure that it's just a coincidence that it's the same school where Michael Tracey is tenured!:crazy

Miller's offer was substantially different. No self-respecting man could accept the terms of the deal he was offered. The deal was that Miller would go free IF he voluntarily gave up his law license and personally repudiated his own handwriting credentials. He told them to stuff their deal.

So, he went to trial. During the trial, his lawyer called to the witness stand a man named David Williams. David Williams was a private investigator employed by Hal Haddon's law firm. Williams admitted on the witness stand that he and several other private investigators had been ordered by Hal Haddon himself to find "dirt" on Miller, something that would bring his credibility as a handwriting expert into question.

Why did they do this? Well, according to Williams, Haddon was afraid that Miller might be called to testify against Patsy Ramsey if the Rs were ever brought to trial. So, Williams and the others were dispatched to pry into his private and professional life, searching for any kind of professional breach of ethics or illegal act, anything that could be used to give a jury reason not to believe him. When they couldn't find one, they decided to MAKE one. Thus, the request to Dave Thomas to bring charges against him. It was a despicable instance of the political cronyism that ruined this case.

When it was all said and done, it took the jury less than one hour of deliberations to set Miller free. SOME justice prevailed, I guess.

Right now, you're probably asking, "how do you know all of this, SD?" Well, the answer is that I actually have a transcript of the Miller trial. Williams was not the only person from Team Ramsey called as a witness. Pat Foreman, Haddon's partner, was another. He corroborated Williams' statements.

It's scary that the Haddon law firm wields that kind of unchecked power.

SuperDave said:

I can elaborate on it 'til the cows come home, runsdeep! It's a sordid and somewhat infuriating tale, a disturbing illustration of just how much power the Haddon law firm wields in Colorado.

Here goes: in mid-1997, Craig Lewis, the GLOBE news editor--if you could call him that--hatched a scheme to buy a copy of the ransom note. The plan was to offer Don Vacca, a Ramsey-hired handwriting expert, a sum of money in exchange for a copy. He hired a local attorney named Thomas Miller (hereafter known as Tom Miller) under false pretenses and put his plan into action. The meeting went down, Lewis made his offer, and Vacca rejected it. Vacca went to the authorities and demanded action, but the Jefferson County DA blew it off. I'm not really sure why; maybe they figured it wasn't worth pursuing.

Well, by the end of that year, Miller, who was also a handwriting expert well-respected in the Colorado court system, got the materials legit and made his conclusion as to who wrote it: Patsy Ramsey.

Here's where it gets interesting. Eventually, word leaked up to Hal Haddon, the senior partner in Haddon, Forman and Morgan, the Ramseys' lawyers. Haddon was friends with Dave Thomas, the Jefferson County DA, and apparently called in a favor. The favor was that, after two full years of the JC DA saying that it wasn't worth pursuing, Lewis and Miller were arrested and charged with commercial bribery, with Lewis getting slapped with extortion to boot.

Miller was puzzled as to why he got hauled in on this beef. It soon became apparent that HE was the real target all along, not Lewis. He saw the handwriting on the wall when he saw how different the plea deals that they were offered were. Lewis got a sweetheart offer: if the GLOBE agreed to make a donation of $100,000 to the University of Colorado, Boulder journalism school, he'd be free and clear. The donation was made, and Craig Lewis walked free that very day. (I wonder why they were so specific on THAT particular school receiving the money. I'm sure that it's just a coincidence that it's the same school where Michael Tracey is tenured!:crazy

Miller's offer was substantially different. No self-respecting man could accept the terms of the deal he was offered. The deal was that Miller would go free IF he voluntarily gave up his law license and personally repudiated his own handwriting credentials. He told them to stuff their deal.

So, he went to trial. During the trial, his lawyer called to the witness stand a man named David Williams. David Williams was a private investigator employed by Hal Haddon's law firm. Williams admitted on the witness stand that he and several other private investigators had been ordered by Hal Haddon himself to find "dirt" on Miller, something that would bring his credibility as a handwriting expert into question.

Why did they do this? Well, according to Williams, Haddon was afraid that Miller might be called to testify against Patsy Ramsey if the Rs were ever brought to trial. So, Williams and the others were dispatched to pry into his private and professional life, searching for any kind of professional breach of ethics or illegal act, anything that could be used to give a jury reason not to believe him. When they couldn't find one, they decided to MAKE one. Thus, the request to Dave Thomas to bring charges against him. It was a despicable instance of the political cronyism that ruined this case.

When it was all said and done, it took the jury less than one hour of deliberations to set Miller free. SOME justice prevailed, I guess.

Right now, you're probably asking, "how do you know all of this, SD?" Well, the answer is that I actually have a transcript of the Miller trial. Williams was not the only person from Team Ramsey called as a witness. Pat Foreman, Haddon's partner, was another. He corroborated Williams' statements.

It's scary that the Haddon law firm wields that kind of unchecked power.

Click to expand...

Kind of makes you wonder about all the people who "saw" it the ramsey way. Mr. Lou Smit might not have been swayed by his faith as much as I thought..probably just old fashioned greed..lots of money flew around to keep the ramseys out of court...doesn't hurt to own the prosecutor.

Mikebr said:

Kind of makes you wonder about all the people who "saw" it the ramsey way. Mr. Lou Smit might not have been swayed by his faith as much as I thought..probably just old fashioned greed..lots of money flew around to keep the ramseys out of court...doesn't hurt to own the prosecutor.

Click to expand...

The question that SHOULD be asked here is, "why would an innocent person NEED to pull such an underhanded trick?"

In fairness, Tom Miller's personal feelings aside, we don't know for sure how much the Ramseys knew about this. It goes back to the Watergate question: "what did they know and when did they know it?" It could be that the Rs purposely tried NOT to know what their hired stooges were up to. That's known as "plausible deniability" in politics.

But as the old saw holds, even if you're innocent, a lawyer will defend you like you're guilty. I've heard it argued that Tom Miller was not a "legit" analyst and as such, could not give testimony. I'm sure the Colorado court system would be surprised to hear that! But more importantly, the fact that the Haddon law firm pulled this stunt pretty much says it all: they had to keep him out because he WAS credible. That's about as plain as the nose on my face.

JonBenet's murder is a constant in my mind. I catch myself hoping that it will be in my lifetime that she will receive justice. SuperDave, and others, have pretty much solved this case time and time again, which leads me to this question to you; SD: Don't you get tired of having the same conversation over and over and over, year after year after year with new crops of IDIs? I don't know how you do it. Keep trucking, sending you some patience, tolerance and stamina

Tessa2009 said:

JonBenet's murder is a constant in my mind. I catch myself hoping that it will be in my lifetime that she will receive justice. SuperDave, and others, have pretty much solved this case time and time again, which leads me to this question to you; SD: Don't you get tired of having the same conversation over and over and over, year after year after year with new crops of IDIs? I don't know how you do it. Keep trucking, sending you some patience, tolerance and stamina

Click to expand...

I am grateful for the likes of SD and the numerous others who have guided me through the discovery process. I was a teen when JBR was murdered and here in Singapore, I did not get much news/coverage save for the Time magazine article/s and so on. Many many years later, when I was in the US for a postgrad stint in the summer of 2008 till 10, it was the Caylee Anthony debacle that lured me to the W'Sers forum - that an being stuck indoors during the snowstorms in 08!! You folks kept me very warm.

My attention to the JBR case manifested only recently after the ACA case. Again, with reference to JBR, most of the knowledge I had were outdated information purported by IDI theorists. It was just one week ago when several folks here guided me through hundreds of documents and through their sheer patience (instead of rolling their eyes at yet another IDI theorist here!) that made me sieve through the information to state that the IDI theory is utter BS. I've also noted the great amount of users banned in the JBR forum so I applaud the passion and commitment here.

If nothing else, I know that I am sharpening my mind and honing my critical/analytical thinking skills. Thank you!

Tessa2009 said:

JonBenet's murder is a constant in my mind. I catch myself hoping that it will be in my lifetime that she will receive justice. SuperDave, and others, have pretty much solved this case time and time again, which leads me to this question to you; SD: Don't you get tired of having the same conversation over and over and over, year after year after year with new crops of IDIs? I don't know how you do it. Keep trucking, sending you some patience, tolerance and stamina

Click to expand...

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Glad you feel the case is solved.

Roy23 said:

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Glad you feel the case is solved.

Click to expand...

I am sure lots of people feel the case is solved, including the BPD. But they can't actually close the case or admit it is solved because they know the case cannot be prosecuted.

DeeDee249 said:

I am sure lots of people feel the case is solved, including the BPD. But they can't actually close the case or admit it is solved because they know the case cannot be prosecuted.

Click to expand...

Maybe somehow this HAS become a DNA case.
First time I heard Lou Smit saying in one of his tv appearances that maybe in 20 or 30 years they will be able to clone (or something) the dna owner based on that sample I laughed and rolled my eyes.

But for now I think that a DNA match is the only chance.

If it matches a factory worker or someone who wasn't in Boulder the night of the murder but somehow had contact with her clothes before,bingo,I guess it's obvious RDI and dna is not relevant.

If it matches a sick puppy we have a possible intruder.

Or maybe it matches someone with a military background (AG employee,etc) and we have a possible Ramsey accomplice (crime scene cleaner,etc)

So maybe DNA IS the best shot they have?
Cause I don't hope for a confession anymore.

I don't feel it's a case of DNA - totally. Through the years, truth has been muddied by the power of the "authorties" and the money of the Ramsey's. It's as simple as that. Not ONE person of this world who is INNOCENT would lawyer up BEFORE the police show up AND a body is found. Sorry.....it just doesn't happen.

madeleine said:

Maybe somehow this HAS become a DNA case.
First time I heard Lou Smit saying in one of his tv appearances that maybe in 20 or 30 years they will be able to clone (or something) the dna owner based on that sample I laughed and rolled my eyes.

But for now I think that a DNA match is the only chance.

If it matches a factory worker or someone who wasn't in Boulder the night of the murder but somehow had contact with her clothes before,bingo,I guess it's obvious RDI and dna is not relevant.

If it matches a sick puppy we have a possible intruder.

Or maybe it matches someone with a military background (AG employee,etc) and we have a possible Ramsey accomplice (crime scene cleaner,etc)

So maybe DNA IS the best shot they have?
Cause I don't hope for a confession anymore.

Click to expand...

I think LE is telling you just that for the most part. I think they also started back from the beginning and were investigating many other areas as well. But, yeah, DNA is a huge part.

Roy23 said:

I think LE is telling you just that for the most part. I think they also started back from the beginning and were investigating many other areas as well. But, yeah, DNA is a huge part.

Click to expand...

yeah but then again most IDI's are somehow contradicting themselves,cause they claim:

1.DNA is crucial and we must trust it
but on the other hand
2.BPD is so incompetent and that's why there is no other evidence of the intruder,they failed to collect it

then how can we trust this DNA evidence so much if the crime scene was so contaminated by these incompetent cops?
this DNA was collected by these people who we can't trust because they contaminated the crime scene and messed everything up

it's like trusting a message 100% when the messenger is a total liar/manipulator :waitasec:

Tessa2009 said:

I don't feel it's a case of DNA - totally.

Click to expand...

it is IMO if a match can prove once and for all whether it's related to the murder or totally irrelevant (transfer)
it would actually be a huge thing,if it matches a factory worker for ex then the intruder theory becomes totally ridiculous so they would have to start all over and the Ramseys would be top suspects again.
if it matches a sick puppy then I guess we were all wrong but hey,finally something will happen.
a DNA match,doesn't matter which of the scenarios above,will force things to MOVE ON.it's time IMO.

Through the years, truth has been muddied by the power of the "authorties" and the money of the Ramsey's. It's as simple as that. Not ONE person of this world who is INNOCENT would lawyer up BEFORE the police show up AND a body is found. Sorry.....it just doesn't happen.

Click to expand...

that's part of another story

madeleine said:

it is IMO if a match can prove once and for all whether it's related to the murder or totally irrelevant (transfer)
it would actually be a huge thing,if it matches a factory worker for ex then the intruder theory becomes totally ridiculous so they would have to start all over and the Ramseys would be top suspects again.
if it matches a sick puppy then I guess we were all wrong but hey,finally something will happen.
a DNA match,doesn't matter which of the scenarios above,will force things to MOVE ON.it's time IMO.



that's part of another story

Click to expand...

madeleine,

the intruder theory becomes totally ridiculous

Click to expand...

Its already so ridiculous verging on farce with the Ramsey's being exonerated.

The untold story and the one that will one day make a compelling documentary is how John engineered the prosecution to do his bidding!


.

UKGuy said:

madeleine,


Its already so ridiculous verging on farce with the Ramsey's being exonerated.

The untold story and the one that will one day make a compelling documentary is how John engineered the prosecution to do his bidding!


.

Click to expand...

Isn't that the truth! that is the true mystery.

Mikebr said:

Isn't that the truth! that is the true mystery.

Click to expand...

Mikebr,

Yes, IMO, this represents the alleged conspiracy. Not a very fashionable view given all the 9/11, JFK, Trotsky and Alien Abduction stuff that is out there on the internet.

But by definition you only ever get to hear about the unsuccessful conspiracies along with all the revisionist pseudo versions.

A very good review of conspiracies is outlined in : Voodoo Histories: the role of Conspiracy Theory in Modern History (2009) by David Aaronovitch Reccomended reading!


.

UKGuy said:

Mikebr,

Yes, IMO, this represents the alleged conspiracy. Not a very fashionable view given all the 9/11, JFK, Trotsky and Alien Abduction stuff that is out there on the internet.

But by definition you only ever get to hear about the unsuccessful conspiracies along with all the revisionist pseudo versions.

A very good review of conspiracies is outlined in : Voodoo Histories: the role of Conspiracy Theory in Modern History (2009) by David Aaronovitch Reccomended reading!


.

Click to expand...

Yeah but whats behind this conspiracy is more fundamental..money and greed. i wish we could look at the banking activities of the prominent players..bet they would tell a tale. Of course there are other ways to pay off people other than direct payments..and there are other ways to coerce people to do your bidding other than money. The minions of the ramseys maybe have found dirt on people.