Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 63
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    9,919
    I dont think it will ever be solved.


  2. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Somewhere In Time
    Posts
    5,838
    Quote Originally Posted by JMO8778
    I think there are ppl who know *exactly what happened;and I suspect there are other outsiders who have figured it out per the evidence that was released,like Mark Fuhrman,for example.
    I agree...and I don't know what everyone is waiting for to tell what they know.
    "This time we get it right."


  3. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Somewhere In Time
    Posts
    5,838
    Quote Originally Posted by capps
    So,they spent all that money on Mark Karr,for a charade?
    LOL..maybe they thought that the pubic was lacking entertainment....
    "This time we get it right."


  4. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,053
    Quote Originally Posted by coloradokares
    I think it was solved before the grand jury convened. But never prosecuted. I think for sure by the end of the grand jury it was still solved but never prosectued. And unless we stampede the fortress en mass.....and refuse to let this stand.....I am not sure even with our current governor .....that much will change. I am hopeful but at this juncture I'd hate to bet the farm either way.

    coloradokares,

    Colorado law, IMO, has placed the state into a catch 22 situation in the JonBenet Ramsey case. The Colorado Children's Code prevents the disclosure of the names of very young children who have been involved in a major crime. Therefore, if the crime has been solved but the perpetrators are too young to even prosecute, how can the public be told who did it without violating Colorado law shielding the names of the children? The public can't be told. And that, IMO, is why this case will stay in limbo for a long time to come as Colorado authorities continue to dance around the tough questions.

    John Mark Karr? It appears he was deliberately used to further confuse the case and divert attention from the truth. Incidentally, the evidence reveals there was likely more than one perp involved in the killing of JonBenet. Thus, Karr's DNA simply not matching the DNA in JonBenet's underwear does not automatically clear him as one of the perps.

    BlueCrab


  5. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Somewhere In Time
    Posts
    5,838
    Quote Originally Posted by michelle
    I dont think it will ever be solved.
    My dad, uncle, brother and husband were all in the military Michelle...my brother was in the first war in Iraq, and survived an explosion on his ship. I just want to tell you to tell your brother THANK YOU for serving our country, and I will pray for him. (I saw your signature at the end of your post!)
    "This time we get it right."


  6. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    9,919
    Quote Originally Posted by Ames
    My dad, uncle, brother and husband were all in the military Michelle...my brother was in the first war in Iraq, and survived an explosion on his ship. I just want to tell you to tell your brother THANK YOU for serving our country, and I will pray for him. (I saw your signature at the end of your post!)
    Awww, Thank you that is sweet. They can all use the prayer that is for sure.


  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    140
    No offence, BlueCrab, but I don't agree with your theory. However, since it is your theory and you do know about Colorado law in connection with this, does shielding a child who has committed a major crime mean, in effect, that no adults who helped in the perpetration or cover-up of the crime can possibly be charged? Because, if so, that seems like a particularly dangerous legal loophole.

    For instance, suppose an adult in CO gives a minor a gun and tells him to stick up a convenience store; he does, and kills a store clerk. Does the fact that the child has committed the crime and must be protected automatically mean that the adult cannot be charged with being an accessory before the fact in a murder case?

    Or, to refer to this case, does the fact that the BPD 'knows' that BR has committed this crime mean that the police can never charge his parents with being accessories after the fact, evidence tampering, and obstruction of justice, just to name a few?

    I find that incomprehensible, but am willing to be instructed.

    For myself, I do think it possible that this case may be solved and even prosecuted, but I admit that's because I think JR did it!


  8. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,393
    Quote Originally Posted by Dru
    No offence, BlueCrab, but I don't agree with your theory. However, since it is your theory and you do know about Colorado law in connection with this, does shielding a child who has committed a major crime mean, in effect, that no adults who helped in the perpetration or cover-up of the crime can possibly be charged? Because, if so, that seems like a particularly dangerous legal loophole.

    For instance, suppose an adult in CO gives a minor a gun and tells him to stick up a convenience store; he does, and kills a store clerk. Does the fact that the child has committed the crime and must be protected automatically mean that the adult cannot be charged with being an accessory before the fact in a murder case?

    Or, to refer to this case, does the fact that the BPD 'knows' that BR has committed this crime mean that the police can never charge his parents with being accessories after the fact, evidence tampering, and obstruction of justice, just to name a few?

    I find that incomprehensible, but am willing to be instructed.

    For myself, I do think it possible that this case may be solved and even prosecuted, but I admit that's because I think JR did it!
    They can indeed be charged. Whether they would be or not is almost at DA descretion. Lets give Blue Crabs theory a bounce and see where the ball lands. John cannot be compelled to testify against Patsy or Patsy John. If Burke copped to it all..... then it'd be hard to press. However......that is if Blue Crab is correct. Thats a big if. As for Karr.....that he's had more than 15 minutes already is ludicrous enough. Why should I keep the clock ticking.


  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,555
    Quote Originally Posted by coloradokares
    They can indeed be charged. Whether they would be or not is almost at DA descretion. Lets give Blue Crabs theory a bounce and see where the ball lands. John cannot be compelled to testify against Patsy or Patsy John. If Burke copped to it all..... then it'd be hard to press. However......that is if Blue Crab is correct. Thats a big if. As for Karr.....that he's had more than 15 minutes already is ludicrous enough. Why should I keep the clock ticking.
    what if...BR didn't do it,but JR and PR put the blame on him anyway..without him knowing it?? I haven't thought about it much so I don't know if the idea fits or not..but seeing as they so willingly threw a lot of their close friends under the bus..maybe they would do the same w their own son..they seemed to be willing to do almost anything to save their arse.
    something to ponder:

    When the corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and the mortal have put on immortality, then shall we be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

    O death, where [is] thy sting? O grave, where [is] thy victory?

    The sting of death [is] sin; and the strength of sin [is] the law.
    But thanks [be] to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
    1 Corinthians 15:54-57


  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,808

    Fuhrman Evidence

    Quote Originally Posted by JMO8778
    I think there are ppl who know *exactly what happened;and I suspect there are other outsiders who have figured it out per the evidence that was released,like Mark Fuhrman,for example.
    JMO,

    Can you direct me to the evidence that Mark Fuhrman released. Really appreciate it. Thanks, Solace


  11. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Somewhere In Time
    Posts
    5,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Solace
    JMO,

    Can you direct me to the evidence that Mark Fuhrman released. Really appreciate it. Thanks, Solace
    I would love to be directed to this source too...should be quite interesting.
    "This time we get it right."


  12. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,399
    Quote Originally Posted by hipmamajen
    I think that the case has already been solved, but that no one will ever be formally charged or imprisoned for the crime.
    Me too.


  13. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,053
    Quote Originally Posted by Solace
    JMO,

    Can you direct me to the evidence that Mark Fuhrman released. Really appreciate it. Thanks, Solace

    Solace,

    I don't think JMO meant that literally. I don't know of any significant evidence that Mark Fuhrman released on the Ramsey case. However, a long time ago on a panel show he did say something about Ramsey DNA markers, not JonBenet's, being in the sample from JonBenet's panties. When he said it the camera swung over to Dr. Michael Baden who was caught shaking his head silently in the affirmative.

    BlueCrab


  14. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,393
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCrab
    Solace,

    I don't think JMO meant that literally. I don't know of any significant evidence that Mark Fuhrman released on the Ramsey case. However, a long time ago on a panel show he did say something about Ramsey DNA markers, not JonBenet's, being in the sample from JonBenet's panties. When he said it the camera swung over to Dr. Michael Baden who was caught shaking his head silently in the affirmative.

    BlueCrab
    I'd not heard that.....please Blue Crab explain further. Ramsey DNA markers, not JonBnet's being in the sample from JonBenet's panties?!?!?!?!? Do you have any way that you can think of to verify that. Such as a transcript of that panel show. I respect Dr. Micheal Baden.......


  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,555
    Quote Originally Posted by Solace
    JMO,

    Can you direct me to the evidence that Mark Fuhrman released. Really appreciate it. Thanks, Solace
    he didn't release any that I know of,what I'm saying is that based on what has been publicly released...I think he likely has it figured out.
    something to ponder:

    When the corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and the mortal have put on immortality, then shall we be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

    O death, where [is] thy sting? O grave, where [is] thy victory?

    The sting of death [is] sin; and the strength of sin [is] the law.
    But thanks [be] to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
    1 Corinthians 15:54-57


Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •