1019 users online (239 members and 780 guests)  


Websleuths News

View Poll Results: Why wasn't this case solved?

Voters
58. You may not vote on this poll
  • Incompetence

    13 22.41%
  • Money&connections

    6 10.34%
  • incompetence,money&connections

    39 67.24%

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 62
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970

    Incompetence or something else?

    I am not sure anymore that this case wasn't solved due to incompetence.

    If you know that you can't handle such a case,why refuse the FBI's help.

    Why were the first officers at the scene instructed to treat the parents as victims.

    From ST's book:


    "Although putting Trujillo on evidence would remove him from fieldwork,he seemed to have a problem with priorities,and I was concerned that his slowness in accomplishing tasks might hinder the testing of evidence.For instance,a full year passed before he completed his report on the initial Atlanta trip."


    "The first officer was having difficulty in recollecting certain events."



    Let's not forget Arndt's strange behaviour,now she's getting flowers from suspects,then she's going on TV claiming JR did it.

    Everything the DA office did

    ML,no need to comment.


    At first I thought this case was screwed up because everybody in Boulder is incompetent.
    Maybe I was wrong .

    Maybe those who say it was about the money are right.Not sayin' the entire BPD knows,it's enough for their bosses to know,who then instruct their officers to follow leads that are going nowhere.

    So why wasn't this case solved?
    Incompetence?
    Money&connections?
    or
    All of the above?

    I just can't believe how unlucky JB was..........

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    Still trying to understand what ML did and why she did it.Cause a competent,smart DA would know better.

    Was it incompetence,ego or was it about something else?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    187
    From an outsider's point of veiw there definatly seems to have been a high level of incompetence.
    Starting from the first report of a kinapping and onwards.
    IMO the police should have done a search of the house when they first got there, while other officers should have been getting as much info from the parents.
    was money or connections a factor? I dunno if they didn't play any part then theres a lot of incompetance around, maybe the Ramsey's were considered a wealthy family so some people didn't look at the initial kidnap in the same way they would have for most people.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by madeleine View Post
    Still trying to understand what ML did and why she did it.Cause a competent,smart DA would know better.

    Was it incompetence,ego or was it about something else?

    This makes no sense, as DNA was discovered at the crime scene that has the property of being mutually corroborative. ML then simply made a rational deduction based on this event. Your post seems to proceed on the assumption that there was no DNA event.

    Understanding what ML did only requires that you understand the DNA events and its significance, and its evident that you dont fully understand them or the driving force behind the DA's actions. This seems true because the DNA events are a glaring omission from your post.

    Had the BPD arrested JR or PR early on, and never ever found this DNA, then incompetence would be a factor. Had the BPD not used the term 'umbrella of suspicion' and not required PR to give full right and left hand exemplars word for word of the ransom note, then connections and money could be a factor.

    I cant vote on your poll because of glaring omissions of other possibilities. Only three choices are provided when obviously none of the three are applicable.
    Last edited by Holdontoyourhat; 12-19-2010 at 01:49 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    563
    Incompetence and alot of stubborn people...all the way around.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    This makes no sense, as DNA was discovered at the crime scene that has the property of being mutually corroborative. ML then simply made a rational deduction based on this event. Your post seems to proceed on the assumption that there was no DNA event.
    Can you go to court with her findings?NO (lol,imagine F.Lee Bailey/the alledged intruder's defence lawyer, playing with these DNA findings,better,throwing it out of court in one second)
    Then,IMO,it's not enough to clear someone either and a competent unbiased DA would know it.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    Until it's a match,this DNA is nothing.It's only stuff ML put in an exoneration letter,it proves nothing,it tells us nothing about who killed JB,how and why.So what are we talking about here.You can't even call it evidence since you can't go to court with it,it's corroborated with nothing else.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    STEELER COUNTRY!
    Posts
    27,332
    I voted incompetance AND money and influence.
    Boulder LE was not experienced in murder, let alone a child murder.
    Nor in high profile kidnapping..........
    The house (crime scene) was never controlled.
    The Ramseys were powerful people in the community.
    Money talks...............
    exactly like in the OJ case........people were in ahhhh, of the wealthy couple and treated with kid gloves!
    Kyron, HALEIGH, ADJI & Gabriel NEEDS PRAYERS NOW TO FIND THEM!. Zahra & Jonathan in heaven
    Justice for Hailey!!!!
    No Justice for Caylee Marie..........

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by madeleine View Post
    .You can't even call it evidence...
    Yes I can and I'm not alone. CNN, Fox, CBS, NYTimes, and more all call it evidence. This means you're wrong.

    Evidence is anything that tends to prove or disprove something. It seems you want this to be called evidence if and only if it proves a specific person did it . This is flat wrong. The evidence can also be used to prove a third party was there that night who was not a family member.

    For credibility sake, please go ahead and call it evidence because it is.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    Yes I can and I'm not alone. CNN, Fox, CBS, NYTimes, and more all call it evidence. This means you're wrong.

    For credibility sake, please go ahead and call it evidence.


    CNN and fox can call it whatever they want,they don't have to go to court with it .


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    It seems you want this to be called evidence if and only if it proves a specific person did it .
    Huh?
    Doesn't apply to me,I am not one of those who have only ONE suspect in mind.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    DNA alone is nothing (in this case) and ML probably knows it too,she used it to exonerate someone which is totally different than trying to charge someone.
    Why did she do it just before she left,hm?So she doesn't have to explain herself.Why didn't she test the rest of the evidence?No,she only tested what was needed in order to clear them.Why didn't she test stuff that could tell us more about the intruder?Or help get him?Cause this wasn't her mission,the intruder,her mission was the Ramsey's.HUGE difference.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    563
    And lets not forget arrogance in the way ST thought it was such an obvious case that he refused to look at anything else with any serious objective eyes and the arrogance of the whole department thinking they had it in the box, thus not keeping good notes or records and letting the investigation be subjective instead of objective.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    3,577
    I believe the whole case actually started on December 23rd, with the 911 phone call that night. Solve that mystery and the BPD as well as the DA's office will be much closer to solving the December 25th/26th mystery.

    Was the BPD expert at child murder? Of course not, but were their investigative powers staunched by the DA's office and the R's lawyers, most certainly. Which of course speaks more to the mentality of the DA's office in Boulder, rather than the R's lawyers. They were being paid handsomely to do exactly what they have done.

    Add in poor crime scene management, detectives that were in over their heads before they even started, the results are exactly how they appear today.

    There is one piece of evidence that can not be explained away, no matter what else ever happens in this case. Why did the Ramseys choose to put December 25th on JonBenets headstone?

    So my vote, police mistakes, DA influence and good lawyers, made this case what it is today.
    ___________________

    "This Time We Get It Right!"
    If you can read this, thank a teacher, if it's in English, thank a soldier!
    If I forget to mention it. Everything I post is my opinion, right or wrong, good or bad.
    If you have questions about Rebecca Zahaus death, please watch this:http://websleuths.com/forums/showpos...00&postcount=1

  15. #15
    Why did the Ramseys choose to put December 25th on JonBenets headstone?

    That one's easy to answer IMO.Because it sounds more dramatic and significant then December 24th.

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Boulder DA-A Profile in Incompetence
    By SuperDave in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 07-15-2010, 03:26 AM
  2. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 08-20-2009, 05:17 AM
  3. Man defends self claims Incompetence
    By golfmom in forum Bizarre and Off-Beat News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-07-2005, 09:43 AM
  4. Ramsey PI Incompetence
    By Jayelles in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-20-2004, 06:42 PM