Jayelles said:
BC - why do you think they were "taken out" as opposed to just being omitted in the first place. I think you may have explained this before, but I'd appreciate if you reminded me.
I tend to brainstorm a project before I start writing. If I were writing a book about a set of people, I might start by writing a list of all the names of the people involved and then try to cover them in more detail. Maybe Schindler did this? ... and then removed the ones he didn't cover - or which weren't too interesting..
Jayelles,
It was the timing. Schiller had his book, "Perfect Murder Perfect Town", ready for the presses and was waiting in late 1999 for the Ramsey grand jury to finally adjourn so he could include the jury's decision (who was indicted, etc.).
When the GJ finally adjourned on October 13, 1999, after investigating for 13 months, it surprised almost everyone by not indicting anyone in the murder of JonBenet Ramsey. IMO, the reason there were no indictments was because children too young to prosecute were involved. And not only that, but under the Colorado Chidren's Code, the names of the children would had to have been kept strictly confidential.
Schiller, who had access to all of the police reports, knew what was going on and was coerced by Boulder authorities (he admits it in his book) to cooperate in what amounts to a government endorsed coverup of the truth. This led to scrambling by Schiller and his publisher to delete certain names and references, which they did.
However, that left a big red flag waving in the air -- people who had been a part of the daily lives of the Ramseys were now not even mentioned in Schiller's book. The purging of one person's name, however, was apparently botched. His name appears only once in the text, but his name appears nine times in the book's name index. The other person's name wasn't mentioned at all in PMPT, despite his membership in what could be considered a scary small foreign faction on campus and his daily personal access to Burke and JonBenet.
Therefore, I released his name and background on the internet a couple of years ago because, IMO, the public had a right to know. Both of these gentlemen may be perfectly innocent, as asdasd says, but I don't agree with the coverup of the names. Why are only THEIR names kept confidential?
BlueCrab
