1086 users online (213 members and 873 guests)  


Websleuths News


Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    343

    Thumbs down A Closer Look (at how to run a PR campaign)

    I know that there is already a thread devoted to last night's CourtTV special, but I would like to start a new one to address all the flaws that I picked up in the program. If Tricia or any of the other mods wants to merge it with the other one, so be it, but I thought the critique of the program deserved a thread of its own...

    First of all, the show began by indicating that the producers didn't have the slightest belief that the Ramseys were in any way involved. In fact, they made it seem as though one were crazy to even think of such a scenario. Anyone in LE with any intelligence would have immediately turned to the Ramseys!! It is true that there is evidence that may point away from them, and we are all entitled to our opinions, but until shown otherwise, you HAVE to explore the idea that a Ramsey was involved from the start. And what happened to that exploration? The Ramseys lawyered up and moved to Georgia, waiting 3 months before even giving police an interview.

    Once the show established, or at least purported to establish, that the Ramseys were in no way involved, they turned to these new investigators. Now here, is where I lost all respect for everything that followed. After thoroughly trashing the BPD, the voice-over said something to the effect of, "Since the Boulder police were not willing to budge, the DA's office looked to a team of investigators hired by the Ramseys." WHAT?????!!!!!!! Have you ever heard of conflict of interest? You can't hire investigators already hired by the number-one suspects to "break" the case!!! Then one of the investigators said something along the lines of, "The BPD asked me to help out on the day of the murder, but I refused, because they just wanted to implicate the Ramseys." As an uninvolved investigator on 12/26/96, how was he so sure that the Ramseys had nothing to do with it? You HAD to be thinking that way on 12/26/96 if you were a half-decent investigator!! Was he even asked, or did he just make that up for drama?

    So now, the show moves on, with a group of investigators hired by the Ramseys, and now hired by the DA. GREAT!!! This ought to move things in the right direction. Now, they decide to bring in Michael Helgoth. Hmmmmm...a strange guy who likes guns and lives in Boulder. It MUST be him! He owned Hi-Tek boots and a stun gun, too. First, let's deal with the boots, then the stun gun. I'm not sure where to get the data, but I'd be willing to bet that Hi-Tek is one of the top-5 selling brands of boots. It might even be number 2 behind Timberland, but I don't know for sure. I bet you A LOT of people own Hi-Tek boots, especially in Colorado. And I'd also be willing to bet that about 99% of them have a "Hi-Tek" imprint on the sole. So basically, anyone who has a pair, will "match" the imprint in the Ramsey's basement. But let's not forget the brown specks in Helgoth's imprint! There were also brown specks on the floor of the Ramsey basement. Ok. Call the DA...get the arrest warrant. Where else could a man get a brown speck on the sole of his boot? Dirt?? Actually, I have a better idea, how about you call the lab and do a forensic analysis? They probably did, and it didn't match, so this show didn't tell you about it.

    Now, for the stun gun. Nobody has established that a stun gun was used on JBR. There is speculation surrounding this idea, but some agree and some don't. According to this special, it is a flat-out cold, hard fact of this case. Now, let's assume that this blatant lie is actually true. So Michael Helgoth owned a stun gun. But it wasn't the same stun gun!!! When it comes to handguns/rifles, people may have more than one because they are a collector or whatever, but stun guns, IMO, seem like the type of item where one is plenty. Is that there that much of a difference between two different stun guns? Anyway, it wasn't the same stun gun, IF one was used on JBR, so the analysis should stop there anyway.

    Since none of this "evidence" actually makes Helgoth any more guilty than you or I, the show then decided to propose the idea that Helgoth did not work alone, and that is why the DNA did not match. Here's the problem I have with that. All the evidence they use to suggest more than one perp is complete BS. First, they point to the "two men looking over your daughter" and the "memberS of a foreign faction" from the ransom note. The same ransom note, that every single investigator involved believes is a total diversion tactic and contains no real information. But, if the shoe fits, wear it, right? So let's pretend it's true, to help us implicate Helgoth! Then, they discuss how two people HAD to commit this crime because they brought so much stuff in the house...rope, duct tape, and a stun gun. I think i could fit all that stuff in my pocket, but that's just me.

    Now, after they've given you just enough Helgoth to raise an eyebrow, but not quite enough to actually prove anything, they turn to the other sexual assault in Boulder. Has anyone here ever looked at Boulder crime stats? Aside from the crimes that are probably related to the University (Vandalism, Drug Abuse, DUI, etc...), rape, sexual assault and burglary is a rather common crime. I agree that there are SOME similarities, but it does nothing to further the investigation of this crime.

    In conclusion, I must say that this was perhaps one of the most slanted pieces of garbage I've seen in a while. Perhaps it is part of CourtTV's settlement with the Ramseys? Any other flaws/contradictions/blatant lies identified, please add on...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    3,486
    Thank you VOICE OF REASON. I'm leaving for several days in a few minutes so had no time to detail the flaws in that show. You did rather well. I used the term "infomercial" in another thread and that seems appropriate.

    The Ramsey's may well be shown to be innocent or to have been involved in a complex scheme that went awry...I have a conjecture in mind...But the notion that the police were stupid to focus on them is itself wrong. Recall the police had a note that looks like Patsy's handwriting and writing style, that the Ramsey's immediately made themselves very scarce, that there were possible implications from a fixation on pageants, and other factors from the home. Even the absence of fingerprints on the ransom note raised the question of why wouldn't they pick up the note and read it, and wasn't it Patsy's prints on the pad it came from? The police may have made mistakes but there were valid indicators pointing the family's way. As for the boxes of tips they showed that came to the Ramsey's own investigators...I recall they had a toll free number and a $100,000. offer for alternate scenarios. I envision thousands upon thousands of dubious suggestions that even the new "investigators" (who are the original Ramsey supporers) will never look at. I have little confidence these people will solve the case but there's always hope.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,053
    Court TV should be ashamed of itself. Using nothing but one-sided arguments and no rebuttals anyone could make a case that even The Pope killed JonBenet. The program was a disgrace.

    For instance, a lot was said in the show about the Hi-Tec logo boot print and its possible owner, but nothing was mentioned that the cops finally identified the bootprint next to JonBenet's body in the wine cellar mold was made by BURKE. Burke owned Hi-Tec boots and the Ramseys had all lied about it. The truth came out during the grand jury investigation when Fleet White III, Burke's friend, testified that Burke owned Hi-Tecs; and that was followed by Burke's own admission to the jurors that he did indeed own Hi-Tecs. The hiking boots were easily identified and remembered because they had a compass built right into the boot. Patsy had bought them during a shopping visit to Atlanta. The Ramseys had lied about Burke's boots and Court TV acted as if they didn't know and allowed this and all of the other Ramsey lies to go unchallenged. WHY?

    BlueCrab

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    484
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCrab
    Court TV should be ashamed of itself. Using nothing but one-sided arguments and no rebuttals anyone could make a case that even The Pope killed JonBenet. The program was a disgrace.

    For instance, a lot was said in the show about the Hi-Tec logo boot print and its possible owner, but nothing was mentioned that the cops finally identified the bootprint next to JonBenet's body in the wine cellar mold was made by BURKE. Burke owned Hi-Tec boots and the Ramseys had all lied about it. The truth came out during the grand jury investigation when Fleet White III, Burke's friend, testified that Burke owned Hi-Tecs; and that was followed by Burke's own admission to the jurors that he did indeed own Hi-Tecs. The hiking boots were easily identified and remembered because they had a compass built right into the boot. Patsy had bought them during a shopping visit to Atlanta. The Ramseys had lied about Burke's boots and Court TV acted as if they didn't know and allowed this and all of the other Ramsey lies to go unchallenged. WHY?

    BlueCrab

    To the audience reading BlueCrab's words, I bring you confirmation that Hi-Tec, the boot company, specifically offered children's boots with a compass attached to the laces, and that it was a special promotion, therefore not a common option on just any brand of boot, neither was it an option offered on adult boots. Therefore, any reference Burke would have made to owning a pair of boots with a compass, and attaching the words "Hi-Tec" to them, clearly would refer to the brand name, and not a general use of the phrase "high-tech."

    This is from Footwear News, July 29, 1991:

    Hi-Tec Sports will launch hikers promo

    MODESTO, Calif. - Hi-Tec Sports USA will step up the marketing of its new children's outdoor hiking boot with an incentive campaign centered around the 500th anniversary of Columbus' voyage to the New World.

    The company plans to offer posters, stickers and other amenities as part of a Navigators' Club that children can join when they purchase an item in the new Navigators' series.

    Hi-Tec unveiled an outdoor boot called the Columbus as part of the series. The shoe features a compass tied to the laces. It comes in mochaspruce and navy, priced to retail at $44.95.

    Hi-Tec will coordinate the club membership in Modesto and will send promotional posters with new orders. Details of the promotion will be offered to children in product boxes.

    David Pompel, marketing manager, said he expects the promotion to spur children's sales. He reported company-wide sales for Hi-Tec should grow by 60 percent this year.

    "When the kids get something in the box, they get excited," he said. Pompel added that Hi-Tec's rugged outdoor look is growing more popular as children focus on the environment.

    "We're getting into department stores where the athletic look is dying. We try to make ties to positive values like recycling and the environment."
    "That is my theory, it is mine, and belongs to me and I own it, and what it is too." -- Anne Elk

  5. #5
    So Mary Keenan "hired" Ramsey detectives who are working for free???

    Lou Smit, Ollie Gray, John San Augustin, David Williams, and Jennifer Getty. Anybody know the latter 3's backgrounds?

    Anyhoo, these "investigators" determined that JonBenet suffered no sexual assault, no snow that morning, evidence of a break-in that the killers used a stun gun, strangled her, then hit her over the head.

    THAT IS LOU SMITS THEORY!

    They also reported that no neighbors were interviewed and that two men who lived in the neighborhood moved away soon after the murder.

    There were also two convicted pedophiles who lived nearby who were not investigated.

    That the BPD had the killers DNA all along but failed to test if for DNA. The "new" test on the second blood spot on JonBenet's panties were tested and DNA was extracted and typed into CODIS. No match was found. They believe the killer is a white male.

    How come I'm not surprised that these investigators targeted a dead man....Helgoth aka Bootman???!!!

    THE DEAD CANNOT DEFEND THEMSELVES!!!

    This character John Kenady is another code-six wingnut. He, like Skanky only wanted their fifteen-plus minutes of fame.

    And lastly I agree with VOR...this Ramseymercial was part of the settlement against Courtv....SHAME ON THEM!
    ...We have said to ourselves, look, there is never going to be a victory in this, there is no victory...John Ramsey: 6/24/98

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,053
    To further support that the Ramseys lied about Burke not owning Hi-Tec hiking boots, but changing their minds after being confronted with the evidence -- from the 2000 interviews in Atlanta:

    ATTORNEY BRUCE LEVIN: "We have been provided, and again, one of the sources of this information is confidential grand jury material I can tell you in question, but we have been provided information from two sources that your son Burke, prior to the murder of your daughter, owned and wore Hi-Tec boots that had a compass on them, which makes them distinctive. Do you recall -- if you don't recall that they actually were Hi-Tecs, do you remember Burke having boots that had a compass on the laces?"

    JOHN RAMSEY: "Vaguely. I don't know if they were boots or tennis shoes."

    The Ramseys have been nailed to the cross again and again with their lies, but the media continues to pretend they are innocent. The boulder officials; the courts; and the media; all continue to cover for the Ramseys. Why? They certainly wouldn't cover for an adult perpetrator. By the process of elimination does that or does that not leave children as the likely perpetrators?

    BlueCrab

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    343

    more "news"

    Another piece of "news" that was reported in the CourtTV special:

    1-There was no evidence of prior sexual assault.

    2-A stun gun was used.

    These are two of the most controversial pieces of evidence in this case. There are esteemed experts from both sides of the coin who adamantly disagree on which way the evidence points. To have some show just declare that it is settled in fact, is pure fabrication.

    I know there are many here who feel strongly one way or the other, but we must all admit, that these are issues which, for better or worse, will probably never be agreed upon 100% by the experts, at least not on the public record...

  8. #8

    Stun Gun Marks

    Right now on Courtv they are showing pictures of a woman who was assaulted with a taser by police. She suffered "burns" and the pictures clearly show that the Air Taser marks look larger that the ones on JonBenet's face and legs.

    Awhile back my Son's friend was air-tasered by the cops and he needed to go to the hospital to get stitches.
    ...We have said to ourselves, look, there is never going to be a victory in this, there is no victory...John Ramsey: 6/24/98

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    343

    when did they edit this thing?

    apparently last night's documentary was edited back in 2000 if they're still offering Helgoth's boots as evidence...

    Boots don't match print found near JonBenet
    November 22, 2000

    BOULDER - A pair of boots John and Patsy Ramsey thought might be connected to their daughter's death doesn't match a mysterious shoe print found in the family's house.

    Police Chief Mark Beckner said Monday that tests by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation show the Hi-Tec boots didn't make the partial print found near JonBenet Ramsey's body in the basement.

    In addition, DNA tests and interviews with friends and family of the man who owned the boots led police to conclude that the man wasn't involved in the homicide, Beckner said.

    'There is nothing that ties this guy into the case,' he said.

    In August, the Ramseys gave police a pair of boots obtained by a private investigator they employ. Ollie Gray, the investigator, said the boots could belong to JonBenet's killer.

    The Ramseys have said they believe an intruder killed 6-year-old JonBenet, whose beaten and strangled body was found in the basement of her family's home on Dec. 26, 1996.

    Authorities, however, say the Ramseys remain under suspicion in their daughter's death.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    343

    Who is John Kenady?

    John Kenady is the older man who worked with Helgoth in the junkyard and did most of the "implicating" on last night's show. I will agree that the BPD did not do a great job in the JBR investigation, but let's be careful of who we believe. John Kenady broke into Helgoth's home to provide the "evidence" of Helgoth's involvement in the JBR murder to police. He was arrested on burglary and trespassing charges. He has a long rap sheet...


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NSW Australia
    Posts
    9,182
    Maybe Michael Cook can shed some light on John Kenady.
    Last edited by narlacat; 04-22-2005 at 07:29 PM. Reason: error

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    nowhere special
    Posts
    1,843
    [QUOTE=Toltec]So Mary Keenan "hired" Ramsey detectives who are working for free???

    Lou Smit, Ollie Gray, John San Augustin, David Williams, and Jennifer Getty. Anybody know the latter 3's backgrounds?


    I found this on line--I know John but was not aware he was an investigator until this special. It has been 8 years since I saw him.


    JOHN SAN AUGUSTIN
    EL PASO SHERIFF'S OFFICE

    SPEAKING ON "MULTIMEDIA EVIDENCE PRESENTATIONS IN COURT"

    John is a recognized expert in the field of multimedia presentation of evidence in court--both the advantages and pitfalls. His experience includes the successful prosecution of Nathan Dunlap who is now serving on Death Row and was the last death penalty case heard by a jury in Colorado.

  13. #13
    [QUOTE=Animal04216]
    Quote Originally Posted by Toltec
    So Mary Keenan "hired" Ramsey detectives who are working for free???

    Lou Smit, Ollie Gray, John San Augustin, David Williams, and Jennifer Getty. Anybody know the latter 3's backgrounds?


    I found this on line--I know John but was not aware he was an investigator until this special. It has been 8 years since I saw him.


    JOHN SAN AUGUSTIN
    EL PASO SHERIFF'S OFFICE

    SPEAKING ON "MULTIMEDIA EVIDENCE PRESENTATIONS IN COURT"


    John is a recognized expert in the field of multimedia presentation of evidence in court--both the advantages and pitfalls. His experience includes the successful prosecution of Nathan Dunlap who is now serving on Death Row and was the last death penalty case heard by a jury in Colorado.
    Thanks for the info.
    ...We have said to ourselves, look, there is never going to be a victory in this, there is no victory...John Ramsey: 6/24/98



Similar Threads

  1. JonBenet: A Closer Look
    By Meech in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: 04-25-2005, 05:00 PM